THE BRAILLE MONITOR
April, 1995
Barbara Pierce, Editor
Published in inkprint, Braille, on talking-book disc,
and cassette by
THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT
National Office
1800 Johnson Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21230
* * * *
Letters to the President, address changes,
subscription requests, orders for NFB literature,
articles for the Monitor, and letters to the Editor
should be sent to the National Office.
* * * *
Monitor subscriptions cost the Federation about twenty-five
dollars per year. Members are invited, and non-members are
requested, to cover the subscription cost. Donations should be
made payable to National Federation of the Blind and sent to:
National Federation of the Blind
1800 Johnson Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21230
* * * *
THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND IS NOT AN ORGANIZATION
SPEAKING FOR THE BLIND--IT IS THE BLIND SPEAKING FOR THEMSELVES
ISSN 0006-8829THE BRAILLE MONITOR
PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
CONTENTS
APRIL, 1995
THE JIG IS UP: DETECTABLE WARNINGS PROVEN SAFETY HOAX
by James Gashel
THINGS THAT GO BUMP UNDERGROUND
by Jonathan Yardley
ARKANSAS SCHOOL DEBACLE STILL FRONT-PAGE NEWS
A LETTER FROM TELESENSORY
REPORT OF THE 1995 WASHINGTON SEMINAR
by Barbara Pierce
RAISING THE EARNINGS LIMIT AND PRESERVING LINKAGE: THE BLIND
FIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS
by James Gashel
CREATION OF A FEDERATIONIST
by Joyce Scanlan
DEMONSTRATING LEADERSHIP BY EDUCATING OTHERS
by Christine Boone
I TEACH ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
by Suzanne Whalen
THE NATIONAL LITERARY BRAILLE COMPETENCY TEST:
WHAT'S IN IT, AND WHO SHOULD TAKE IT?
by Thomas Bickford
CHICAGO NOTEBOOK
by Stephen O. Benson
1995 CONVENTION ATTRACTIONS
FINAL SETTLEMENT IN THE DOLLAR RENT A CAR CASE
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: RADIO SPIRITS
by Kenneth Jernigan
RECIPES
MINIATURES
Copyright ■ 1995 National Federation of the Blind
[LEAD PHOTO: Caption: From January 30 through February 1, 1995,
more than 500 Federationists from forty-seven states gathered in
Washington, D.C., to talk with their Senators and Members of
Congress.]
[Lead #1 Caption: Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich talks with
Blanche Griffin, President of the NFB of Georgia, (second from
right) and other Federationists in the halls of Congress.]
[Lead #2 Caption: Senator William Cohen of Maine talks with
Connie Leblond, President of the NFB of Maine, and her son Seth
in his office.]
[Lead #3 Caption: Senator Wendell Ford leans against his office
door while talking with Betty Niceley, President of the NFB of
Kentucky, (center) and members of the Kentucky delegation.]
[Lead #4 Caption: Carla McQuillan, President of the NFB of
Oregon, (second from left) and other members of the NFB of Oregon
stand with Senator Mark Hatfield in his office.]
[Lead #5 Caption: Congressman Jim Leach (seated on sofa arm)
talks with Peggy Elliott, President of the NFB of Iowa, and other
Federationists.]
[Photo #6 Portrait Caption: James Gashel]
THE JIG IS UP:
DETECTABLE WARNINGS PROVEN SAFETY HOAX
by James Gashel
From the Editor: As long ago as the mid eighties I seem to
remember hearing Federationists complain occasionally about the
installation of strips of bumps at some street corners in
communities that considered themselves particularly sensitive to
the needs of disabled people. The presumption was that blind
pedestrians needed these collections of raised domes, which
eventually became known as detectable warnings, in order to find
the streets and cross them safely. Never mind that we had been
crossing intersections for years and continued to do so at every
crossing that had not been adorned with the peel-up tiles.
Through the years the fixative that holds the strips in place has
apparently been improved--at least I don't hear as much these
days about loose strips tripping people as I used to--but members
of the National Federation of the Blind have continued our
opposition to the detectable warnings in all their guises. In bad
weather they collect ice, snow, and mud and are hard to clean
year round. They catch at cane and crutch tips, high heels, and
the small wheels on today's wheelchairs. Moreover, they are, to
say the least, disconcerting to anyone whose balance is at all
uncertain or who steps on them without having realized that they
are there.
Distressingly, the wholesale requirement for dome
installation was inserted into federal law, not only over the
objections of many blind people and with no concern for cost, but
also with no basis in evidence. Quite simply, there is no proof--
and never has been any--that domes are needed. The subject was
never even studied until 1994, though the costly and
controversial requirement was put in place in 1990.
It is fundamental law in this country that the government
may not act without a basis. If it does, it can be successfully
sued for acting in an "arbitrary and capricious manner." The case
of the domes is a sterling example of such an instance. But we in
the Federation decided to oppose this arbitrary and capricious
regulation by other means. We have periodically reported on the
debate that has now raged for several years. (See the December,
1993, issue of the Braille Monitor for the most recent report.)
Jim Gashel is the Director of Governmental Affairs for the
National Federation of the Blind. Here is his summary of the
issue and a report of what has happened recently.
Like most other laws the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) has some potential for doing good and at least as much for
doing harm in the name of doing good. As blind people our
challenge is to capture as much of the former as we can and
prevent the latter from occurring whenever possible. This
observation may seem obvious, but it is a good way to raise the
subject of detectable warnings.
The American Council of the Blind (ACB) has sought to
distinguish itself in recent years as an advocate for detectable
warnings. Its allies in this effort are few in number, but they
do exist. The ACB contends that there is a significant danger to
blind people if transit platform edges, streets approached by
curb ramps, and the like do not have a detectable warning just
before you get to them. The warnings they want are a wide bumpy
strip of raised domes which are "truncated," or flattened on top.
The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board, also known as the Access Board, was given responsibility
under the ADA for issuing accessibility guidelines. Enforcement
of the Board's guidelines is the responsibility of other
agencies. For example, the Department of Justice enforces the
accessibility guidelines with respect to most buildings and
facilities, including public accommodations, other than transit
facilities. The guidelines for transit facilities, on the other
hand, are enforced by the Department of Transportation.
Under the original guidelines adopted in 1990 for both
transit and non-transit facilities, detectable warnings were
required to be installed at many locations. To put it mildly,
this was not a well-thought-out decision. A great many blind
people objected to a rule requiring detectable warnings to be
installed anywhere at all. This was certainly the view expressed
by the National Federation of the Blind, but the Access Board
wasn't listening. Their premise apparently was, if some blind
people feel a need for detectable warnings, that's enough to
justify putting them into the guidelines. The underlying theory
seems to be this: it doesn't matter that a great many blind
people don't want these domes (they are doing okay), but what
about those who are not doing okay--those who are afraid to leave
their houses, those who fear streets or platform edges? Federal
power should be used to help these less fortunate people and
regulate for the lowest common denominator, not for those
exceptional blind people, all of whom seem to be members of the
National Federation of the Blind.
The theory isn't accurate, and it isn't fair. But it arises
from the confused, unarticulated conviction that, though it would
be unkind to say so out loud, the blind (or a lot of them) are
just plain helpless. Left out of this assumption are two simple
truths: Blind people who don't know how to travel independently
in safety can learn to do so without having the world rebuilt for
them, and blind people who can't get around alone safely now
won't get around any more safely with domes everywhere. Skill,
good sense, and confidence make us safe, not domes.
With the rule for detectable warnings firmly in place, the
federal government then took on the responsibility of trying to
make it stick. For some rules, such as the requirement for people
who use wheelchairs to have ramped entrances, there is a logical
connection between the individual's need and the requirement for
access. Without ramped entrances people who use wheelchairs are
totally barred from access to those facilities. This is clearly
discriminatory. Detectable warnings do not provide an analogous
case. Even those who advocate for the installation of the domes
could not argue with any semblance of rationality that their
absence presents a physical barrier to access of the kind that a
flight of stairs presents to a person using a wheelchair.
If an access rule is logically related to a demonstrable
denial of access, those required to comply are virtually
defenseless to resist it. The best they may hope to do is to
delay. Rules for which the need is not provable or about which
there is sharp controversy, however, are much more difficult to
enforce. From the beginning detectable warnings have provided an
instance of this latter situation.
Many of those who were required to comply with the
regulation to install detectable warnings did not accept the
notion that blind people would be deprived of equal access
without them. Reflecting this lack of acceptance, a highly
respected standard-setting group, the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), withdrew detectable warnings from its
guidelines in mid-1992. Since the ANSI standards have generally
been followed by architects and building code officials, this
decision had a powerful impact. By the fall of 1992 even the
Access Board itself began to have second thoughts.
In 1993 the Access Board, the Department of Justice, and the
Department of Transportation jointly decided to suspend their
enforcement of the detectable warnings requirements while the
Access Board commissioned a study. The principal question to be
examined was whether detectable warnings are needed--a question
which had surprisingly never been studied. For reasons that were
never entirely clear, the Department of Transportation, while
suspending its enforcement of the detectable warnings
requirements, chose not to have its facilities included in the
study. As a result the government's regulatory stance began to
follow two steadily diverging tracks.
The Access Board's study, actually conducted by researchers
at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, was completed in the fall of
1994. The results were presented to the Board in great detail at
a meeting on September 13. Here in the language of the
researchers are the findings of the study:
MAJOR FINDINGS
■ Blind travellers process a combination of cues providing
information about the built and social environment to detect
and cross intersections. Skillful travelers do not and will
not rely on a single cue.
■ The most important cues, because they are the most
reliable, are detection of a curb edge, a slope which may be
a curb ramp, traffic sounds, and the end of a building line
or shoreline. Other cues which are often used are texture
changes or counter slopes at the street, street poles, the
sides of curb ramps, and seams between a curb ramp and the
street.
■ Using these cues, experienced blind travelers can detect
an intersection before entering it about 85 percent of the
time.
■ As often as 15 percent of the time, blind travelers will
step into the street before detecting an intersection. They
are 50 percent more likely to enter the street from a curb
ramp than from a curb, but when they step off a curb, they
are provided with a strong cue as to the presence of a
street.
■ About two-thirds of the time that blind travelers enter a
street at a curb ramp, they will detect their situation
within five feet of entering the street. About one-third of
the time, or 5 percent of all crossings at curb ramps, they
will not recognize that they have entered a street within
five feet.
■ Blind travelers are most likely to enter the street in the
absence of reinforcing cues. Among the important situations
are:
- Absence of traffic and traffic sounds.
- Absence of a building or shoreline.
- Gradual slope on a curb ramp.
- Failure to detect a curb edge to the side of the curb
ramp.
■ The principal need at intersections is for a reinforcing
cue, recognizable in the context of an intersection, which
can increase cue density, especially in a low-cue
environment.
■ The larger problem with curb ramps is, not their
detectability, but their potential to disorient a blind
traveler in an unfamiliar area.
- Blind travelers use curb lines not only to detect
intersections, but also to orient to the direction of a
crossing.
- Traffic sounds and building or shore lines provide
more reliable orientation cues, but in their absence a
curb line or curb ramp angle may be the best available
cue.
- Curb ramps that cut a curb at any angle other than
perpendicular and which point in any direction other
than the target area on the other side of the street
are potential hazards to blind travelers in the absence
of other cues or in the absence of good travel skills.
■ Detectable warnings are mildly beneficial to blind
travelers and well liked; but, as currently conceived, they
may not be the best answer to safer intersections.
■ Detectable warning benefits include:
- They do provide a potential confirming cue to the
presence of an intersection.
- They also provide a confirming cue that an
intersection has been completed.
- Even travelers who are inexperienced with detectable
warnings are observed to benefit from them by some
evaluators and overwhelmingly by self-report.
- Most particularly, detectable warnings make it easy
to distinguish the boundaries of a curb ramp and thus
to gain a more secure orientation to components of the
intersection.
■ Problems with detectable warnings include:
- They do not address the problem of orientation of the
other components of an intersection.
- In particular, diagonal curb ramps are misleading in
the absence of other cues.
- So are curb ramps that point into a lane of traffic
(typically a turn lane) on the other side of the
street.
- Detectable warnings that orient travelers to these
kinds of curb ramps do a disservice.
■ Because blind travelers continually adjust to their
situation, perceiving new cues and processing new data, they
will generally recover from any disorientation, error, or
mistake and complete a successful crossing. For this reason
the installation of detectable warnings will make it easier
for blind travelers but may not have any statistically
significant impact on observable outcomes of reasonable
tests which do not allow endangerment of human lives.
There you have the findings, and they confirmed the position
that had long been taken by the Federation. Blind people can
cross streets safely without detectable warnings. They use a
variety of cues to do so. The presence or absence of a detectable
warning does not add significantly to the accuracy of street
crossings by blind pedestrians. In fact, as the research data
suggest, the presence of detectable warnings can orient travelers
to angled curb ramps and thereby do a disservice. As the evidence
was presented to them, many members of the Access Board began to
understand these points. As they did so, not wanting to upset the
dome advocates unduly, they finally drew their conclusions in the
following terms, as articulated by an official of the U.S.
Department of Justice: "Detectable warnings may sometimes be
nice, but they are clearly not necessary."
The nice-but-not-necessary conclusion seems to be the best
description of the current understanding of detectable warnings
by most Access Board members. Meanwhile, with respect to
non-transportation facilities, the guidelines for detectable
warnings remain suspended, while a final, formal decision
--whether to remove detectable warnings from the guidelines or to
re-instate the requirements for their installation--is under
consideration.
Transit facilities are a different question. Although the
requirement for detectable warnings was suspended for several
months, the Department of Transportation chose to try enforcement
rather than study. In order to be effective, however, this course
of action depended upon the cooperation of the various public
transit systems. If even one decided to jump the traces, the
others might eventually follow. The revolt which could ensue
might well threaten the whole enforcement scheme. The federal
government's willingness to enforce the ADA amid the unfunded-
mandates outcry in the country would be on the line.
Enter the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
(WMATA). As a potential adversary over detectable warnings, WMATA
was undoubtedly not the Department of Transportation's first
choice because the Metro rail system operated by WMATA throughout
the greater Washington area is often viewed as a model by others
in the industry, as well as by the millions of tourists who visit
the nation's capital each year. Besides, if the Department of
Transportation (headquartered in Washington, D. C.,) could not
regulate WMATA, what system could it regulate? In any event, as
described by Stephen C. Fehr in the Washington Post of June 9,
1994, the battle over detectable warnings on the raised platform
edges of rail facilities was fully joined. Here is the story:
Metro Ordered to Install New Platform Edge;
Transit Agency Refuses to Comply, Calls Strip
for the Blind a Hazard
The Clinton administration has ordered Metro to stop
fighting installation of subway platform edges intended to warn
blind riders, but transit officials refused yesterday, saying the
new edges would cause passengers to trip and fall onto the
tracks.
U. S. Transportation Secretary Federico Pena told Metro to
remove the white granite platform edges--a distinctive feature of
Washington's subway for eighteen years--and replace them with a
rubber strip of raised bumps.
Metro officials, who have battled federal officials for
nearly three years to keep the eighteen miles of granite edges,
said yesterday that they would not install the strips, setting up
a possible court fight. Most other urban transit systems are
complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act regulation
requiring that the warning strips be installed by July 26,
according to federal officials.
Under the regulation, Metro must widen its existing platform
edge from eighteen inches to twenty-four inches and put in strips
of brightly colored rubber tiles with bumps raised about two-
tenths of an inch. Federal officials believe that visually
impaired riders could feel the bumps with their feet or a cane
and would know that they are close to the platform edge.
The lights in the granite that flash on and off before a
train arrives would remain, officials said.
Pena, in a letter to Metro and in an interview, scolded
local officials for trying to avoid the requirement. Since the
regulation took effect in October, 1991, Metro has proposed four
alternative solutions, saying that the bumpy material is a fire
hazard and that the riders could trip on it.
"Metro's attention appears to have focused too little on
implementation and too much on avoidance of this requirement,"
Pena said in the letter. In the interview he said the department
had listened to all of Metro's proposals, "but at some point we
have to move on to implementation" of the warning strips.
Since 1976, two visually impaired Metro riders have died in
falls onto the tracks, and six others have been injured.
At a meeting yesterday with Federal Transit Administrator
Gordon J. Linton, Metro General Manager Lawrence G. Reuter
proposed that the agency keep the granite edge but texture it so
it would be detected by a disabled person. Linton said he would
consider the proposal, but he has said that the granite edge does
not meet the federal requirement.
Metro officials said they are upset by suggestions they may
be trying to skirt the requirement, which could cost more than
$10 million.
"There's no attempt to avoid compliance," spokeswoman
Patricia A. Lamb said. "The issue isn't compliance, it's safety.
We will not be pushed by the bureaucracy to do something that
isn't the right thing."
Before yesterday Metro had proposed widening the platform
edge by eight inches with either the same smooth granite it
currently has or a rougher, textured granite that would be
detected by people with canes.
But federal officials said eight more inches of such a
surface would not make it easier for visually impaired riders to
find the platform edge. Metro wanted permission to study the
wider granite edge to prove it would work, but Pena said in his
letter that Metro has had nearly three years to study
alternatives.
"Because of the immediate dangers posed to passengers with
visual disabilities, the department cannot afford to delay
compliance while Metro studies alternatives," Pena said.
Federal officials said that, although some of the materials
used for the warning strip are flammable, nonflammable materials
are available. They also rejected Metro's claim that the raised
bumps are dangerous, citing the experience of the San Francisco
and Miami subway systems, which have used them for several years
with few rider complaints.
"Based on the available evidence, there does not appear to
be any evidence to support your fear that the installation of
detectable warnings will place users of your system at risk,"
Pena's letter said.
Metro officials said Washington's subway, which has more
riders than San Francisco or Miami, has had fewer falls off
platforms than those cities. About 71,000 Metro riders are
disabled; of those, about 25,000 are visually impaired.
Organizations representing visually impaired riders are
split on the use of the raised domes.
The American Council of the Blind, which has 42,000 members,
and the American Foundation for the Blind, a research
organization, said the domes are effective. Lobbyist Paul
Schroeder said the regulation requires a uniform system of raised
bumps in all subways so a visually impaired person can travel and
find them anywhere.
"There's nothing left for Metro but to comply," Schroeder
said.
The Baltimore-based National Federation of the Blind, which
has 50,000 members, said the raised bumps are dangerous and give
riders a false sense of security.
"People fall on them," said Marc Maurer, president of the
group. "They're more dangerous. They give the impression
something has been done to protect people, but it doesn't do what
they want it to do."
Metro was the first subway system to be designed with a
platform edge warning. New York and Philadelphia have received
extensions from federal officials because of the high cost of
modifying some of their oldest stations to comply with all of the
regulations.
The situation as the Post described it was clearly
escalating toward a climax as June faded into July. Then, as so
often happens in matters of this kind, "someone blinked." The
someone in this case was the Department of Transportation. Rather
than electing to go to the mat with WMATA, the Department of
Transportation decided to allow some time to pass for cooling off
and reflection. The decision was made to permit WMATA to conduct
a study of its own which would compare the existing granite
edge--a relatively flat surface as compared to the surrounding
floor tiles--with four other types of platform edging, including
truncated domes.
The study commissioned by WMATA was conducted during the
fall of 1994 by researchers at the Battelle Memorial Institute in
Columbus, Ohio. A research facility installed at Battelle's
headquarters was specially constructed for the purpose of testing
platform edge detectability in a metro rail system. Blind and
visually impaired people from the Columbus area were then
recruited as test participants. The tests were designed to
examine various platform edge surfaces and to determine if any of
them would enable blind people to find the edge more readily than
the present granite edge does.
The results of the Battelle study are summarized below,
followed by an article from the Washington Post which appeared on
February 9. With the data from its study now in hand, WMATA is
returning to the Department of Transportation with an application
for what is technically labeled legal recognition of its granite
edging as "equivalent facilitation." In plain English this means
that WMATA is asking the Department of Transportation to find
that the present granite edge is as detectable as a detectable
warning.
As this article is being written in mid-February, it remains
to be seen how the Department of Transportation will respond.
According to the ACB, approval of WMATA's request for equivalent
facilitation will emasculate the detectable warnings regulation
by inviting transit systems everywhere to attempt to find ways
around it. But the facts are now clear. The basis for the
detectable warnings regulation was not sound in the first place.
This is what we in the National Federation of the Blind have said
all along. Now, in case there was ever any doubt about it, our
position has been confirmed by solid research data in two
studies. Here are the Battelle findings:
MAJOR FINDINGS
■ With use of travel aids, persons with visual impairments
should generally be able to detect the platform edge,
regardless of the warning surface used, with a high degree
of reliability.
■ In terms of stopping distances for blind participants, no
statistically reliable differences between warning surfaces
were noted. The average stopping distances were twenty-four
inches or farther from the platform edge in the primary
detection mode (i.e., with the use of travel aids). The
average stopping distances in secondary detection mode
(detection under foot [without travel aids]) were between 8
inches and 9.1 inches. Statistically significant differences
among warning surfaces as a function of detection mode were
small and of no practical significance.
■ Stopping distances for low vision participants in the
primary detection mode averaged twenty-six inches or greater
from the platform edge for all warning surfaces. The average
stopping distances in the secondary detection mode were
between 17.6 inches and 21.6 inches. The differences among
warning surfaces as a function of detection mode were of no
practical significance.
■ The percentage of successful detections in the secondary
mode (detectability under foot [without travel aids]) was
below ninety percent for all warning surfaces tested.
Assuming a ninety-five percent detection rate for
acceptability, none of the warning surfaces was adequate.
So much for the supposed superiority of truncated domes. Now
here is the Washington Post story of February 9, 1995, written by
Stephen Fehr:
Bumpy Metro Edge No Safer for Blind, Report Concludes
A bumpy subway platform edge that federal officials have
ordered Metro to install is no safer for blind riders than the
existing smooth granite edge, according to a study to be released
today.
Based on the study, Metro officials said they would ask the
Clinton administration to let them keep the eighteen miles of
white granite platform edges in stations instead of replacing
them with brightly colored rubber strips with raised domes as
required by law.
Other transit systems across the country have been complying
with what Metro officials call "regulation gone amok." Metro
General Manager Lawrence G. Reuter cites as inexplicable the
federal government's requiring the new edges in only forty-five
of Metro's eighty-three stations.
"If this is really a safety issue, why is it only required
at forty-five stations?" Reuter asked. "Why not all of them?"
Congress may weigh in; Representative Thomas E. Petri (R-
Wisconsin), chairman of a key House transportation subcommittee,
said yesterday that he planned to hold a hearing on the
regulation. The existing platform edge, with its flashing lights
that notify riders of approaching trains, "was built with
handicap access in mind," noted Petri, a frequent Metro rider.
Such warning surfaces, which have a different texture from
the rest of the platform, alert visually impaired riders that
they are nearing the edge of the platform. Two blind Metro riders
have been killed after falling from the platform, and six others
have been injured in the transit system's eighteen-year history.
One advocacy group for the blind says many more falls are not
reported because no one is seriously hurt.
Transportation Secretary Federico Pena has rejected previous
requests by Metro to retain the existing platform edges. Last
year he ordered Metro to install the domed edges as required
under the 1991 Americans with Disabilities Act.
Installing the new surfaces could cost $5 million to $30
million, a so-called unfunded mandate because Metro will have to
fund the project with no help from the federal government.
Pena allowed Metro to conduct tests before making a final
decision. Those tests were made last fall by the Battelle
research firm of Columbus, Ohio, and involved five warning
surfaces, including the rubber strips with domes and Metro's
existing granite edges.
Noting that "the ability of warning surfaces to alert
patrons depends at least in part on how detectable or noticeable
the surfaces are," Battelle researchers concluded that none of
the five surfaces was more detectable than any of the others.
"With the use of travel aids [such as canes or guide dogs],
persons with visual impairments should generally be able to
detect the platform edges, regardless of the warning surface
used, with a high degree of reliability," said the study, which
will be discussed at a Metro board meeting today.
Gordon J. Linton, head of the Federal Transit
Administration, was traveling yesterday, but Berle M. Schiller,
general counsel, said Metro's request to keep their existing
edges would be reviewed. The agency already has concluded tests
showing the domed edges are more effective in preventing falls
because they provide more traction. A public hearing is set for
March 3.
Julie Carroll, a lobbyist for the American Council of the
Blind, said the tests indicated that with Metro's granite
platform edge, a visually impaired rider using a travel aid such
as a cane can detect the edge 95 percent of the time. But with
the domed surfaces, she said, the percentage rises to 100
percent.
Moreover, she said, the study said a rider who does not use
a cane or other device could detect Metro's platform edge only 37
percent of the time compared with 67 percent for the domed
surface.
Although the researchers relied heavily on people who use
canes to reach their conclusions, Carroll said most visually
impaired riders use a combination of their feet and such travel
aids. Thus, she said, the ability to detect the edge with one's
feet is more important than being able to detect it with a cane.
But Reuter said that, when snow and ice are on the platform,
a rider would be unable to detect the bumps of the proposed
surface. Same with a person wearing boots, he said. Also, most
visually impaired riders use a cane and would not continue
walking if they lost it, Reuter said.
Marc Maurer, president of the National Federation of the
Blind, agreed. "Your feet aren't canes," he said. "You invite
injury if you rely on your feet." The Federation supports Metro's
position, largely because that group believes visually impaired
people do not need special consideration on such issues and
should walk on the same surface as everyone else.
"The edge is the edge," Maurer said, "and having these
surfaces doesn't make that much difference."
Federationists have been working now for years to eliminate
domes from our lives. We wish they hadn't shown up in the first
place. But, since they did, we are the only ones who can tell the
truth and make the change that will save the millions that would
otherwise be spent. In cities and towns across the country we
must remain alert and tell state and local governments and
private owners that the domes are not required or soon won't be
and that they shouldn't waste the money to install them. The
Access Board seems to be moving toward this conclusion for non-
transit facilities. And, in the case of transit facilities, we
need to make the point everywhere we can that, as established by
the Battelle study, there are lots of effective platform edges.
Transit authorities shouldn't rush to put the domes in because a
change in the regulations is clearly coming. And we all need to
respond when the issue arrives on the national agenda as it
almost certainly will when the spotlight of unfunded federal
mandates hits the question of access.
One way or another, access must be paid for. One way or
another our country must live up to the ADA or decide to change
it. And, as this debate progresses, one way or another we in the
Federation must insist that the question of access as a whole be
acknowledged as an important issue and that truncated domes be
recognized as a separate matter--unjustified, lavishly expensive,
unwanted--something which should be removed from the national
agenda because it is not a part of access at all.
THINGS THAT GO BUMP UNDERGROUND
by Jonathan Yardley
From the Editor: The regulations implementing the Americans
with Disabilities Act require that entities petitioning to
provide equivalent facilitation rather than that stipulated in
the regulations must conduct a public hearing during the process
of seeking approval for the change. Because the Washington Metro
Area Transit Authority (WMATA) decided to make such a petition
(see the previous story), WMATA officials scheduled a public
hearing on Friday, March 3, at 2:00 p.m. Approximately seventy
witnesses came forward to testify, so the hearing lasted until
nearly midnight. The American Council of the Blind had decided to
hold a press conference at noon to decry the cruelty of WMATA's
desire to keep its rough granite platform edges with their proven
safety record. But at the hearing Federationists outnumbered
WMATA opponents two to one, and the press turned out in force to
chronicle the event.
Not surprisingly, the media found the controversy
disturbing, once they grasped the fact of the huge expenses
involved in retrofitting the entire WMATA system with detectable
warnings. The following article appeared in the Washington Post
on Monday, March 6. It was written by Post columnist Jonathan
Yardley. It was reprinted and echoed in other area publications
in the days following. Here it is:
Speaking more than three decades ago at a news conference,
John F. Kennedy delivered, impromptu, one of the more memorable
utterances of his Presidency. "There is always inequity in life,"
he said. "Some men are killed in a war, and some men are wounded,
and some men never leave the country. . . Life is unfair."
Those words were widely praised at the time as evidence of
the young President's maturity and common sense, but if ever
there was a case of in one ear and out the other, that was it. A
nation that barely a generation ago was able to accept with
equanimity life's inherent unfairness and injustice now regards
its duty as being to root out inequity even when the cost of
doing so "defies reason," as was succinctly said last week.
The speaker was Lawrence G. Reuter, who thus won this
corner's first nomination as Public Servant of the Year. Reuter
is general manager of the Washington area's Metro system; he had
been called before a House transportation subcommittee that is
investigating federal mandates requiring localities to obey the
Americans with Disabilities Act. Under that law federal
bureaucrats are trying to force Metro to install platform edges
with twenty-four-inch-wide rubbery surfaces having raised bumps,
which they claim are warning signals for the blind; the
bureaucrats at Metro, responding in singularly un-bureaucratic
style, thus far have refused to comply, claiming that the
effectiveness of the bumps is unproved and that the cost of
compliance would be in the range of $30 million, which Reuter
says riders would end up paying in higher fares.
The possibility that Reuter is grandstanding cannot be
denied; the disabilities law has been getting deservedly bad
press of late, and taking a stand against it is no longer quite
so risky as when the law was passed five years ago. But the plain
fact--certainly it should be plain to anyone who has encountered
test strips of the bumpy surface at Metro platforms or fully
installed ones at Union Station--is that we have in the case of
the bumps a classic instance of the good intentions of the
disability act leading to mandates that are wholly
disproportionate to the problem under attack.
Presumably any American in possession of something
resembling a heart and/or a conscience is sympathetic to the
difficulties faced by the handicapped and would like to ease
their passage through life. Sympathy for the handicapped is not
at issue here, nor is a reasonable and energetic response to
their needs. But what the bumpy-surface imbroglio illustrates is
that over and over again this response is not merely unreasonable
but downright irrational, pursued by the bureaucracy with a
single-mindedness that permits no deviation or dissent.
It does not matter to this bureaucracy that the blind, for
whom these bumpy surfaces allegedly were invented and then
mandated, are themselves divided over their effectiveness; one
lobbyist for the blind told the subcommittee last week that "many
blind people don't use Metro" for safety reasons, while another
objected that mandates such as this send a message that the blind
"cannot look out for themselves." Nor does it matter to this
bureaucracy that the rubbery surface designed to help the blind
may pose a hazard to others. I can testify from personal
experience that one can slip on this surface if it is wet or trip
over the bumps if he isn't paying attention.
What a delicious if cruel irony it will be when the day
arrives, as surely it will, that a person with full use of all
the senses is killed after tripping over one of these bumps and
falling in front of a Metro or Amtrak train. This is bound to
happen because in attempting to eliminate all vestiges of
unfairness from the lives of those handicapped or otherwise
afflicted, new expenses and/or risks inevitably are created for
the rest of society. Writing about this problem in his excellent
new book, "The Death of Common Sense," Philip K. Howard tells how
"the ethical issues of valuing one group's desires over everyone
else's" were studied by some college professors:
"The problem they posed went like this: The extra cost of
buses that have a lift for wheelchairs meant that 10 percent
fewer buses were purchased; then service was cut back; then a
grandmother in the Bronx had to wait an extra half hour in the
cold of a dangerous neighborhood. Who, they wondered, was
defending her rights?"
As Howard writes, "Situations like this are not
hypothetical." Transit systems of cities and towns across the
country are having to alter and cut back service because of
arbitrary mandates from the faraway federal transit offices.
Those same cities and towns have had to spend thousands upon
thousands of dollars to tear up old sidewalks and build new ramps
for wheelchairs that seldom if ever use them. Joggers on their
daily rounds and mothers pushing perambulators are grateful for
these unexpected conveniences, but for everyone else they are an
expensive luxury. As Howard writes, "Rights are handed out once,
and the legislature, basking in the praise of some group, has no
clue about what the consequences will be."
Ah yes: consequences. In our rush to make the planet perfect
for all those who inhabit it, we tend to pay scant attention to
consequences, dismissing them as the unfortunate but inescapable
price we pay for Doing Good. The trouble is that we often do more
harm than good, which may help explain why the House last week
approved "risk assessment legislation," which, if enacted into
law, would have the central effect of requiring that proposed
environmental standards be subjected to assessments of the risks,
costs, and benefits they would entail before being put into
effect.
No doubt it is true that this legislation, part of the new
majority's tiresome "Contract With America," has a lot more to do
with anti-environmental sentiment than with pure common sense.
But the principle behind it is so sound, it's amazing no one
around here thought of it before. As Mother used to say: Look
before you leap. Don't impose a federal mandate before there is a
good reason to believe that its benefits will at least equal and
preferably exceed its costs.
Don't, to put it another way, follow in the footsteps of
Federal Transit Administrator Gordon J. Linton, who says that if
Metro doesn't cave in and install the bumpy surface, he will ask
the Justice Department to sue it. Great. That's all we need: Your
federal taxes at work, paying federal lawyers to sue the local
lawyers in the employ of Metro. Onward and upward, into the ether
of "fairness."
ARKANSAS SCHOOL DEBACLE STILL FRONT-PAGE NEWS
In the March issue of the Braille Monitor we reported that
one of the four finalists in the search to replace Leonard Ogburn
as superintendent of the Arkansas School for the Blind was Dr.
Richard Umsted (who, like Ogburn, had been forced out of his
superintendent job last summer because of allegations of sexual
misconduct at his school.) In Umsted's case the institution was
the Illinois School for the Visually Impaired (ISVI), and the
sexual misconduct was apparently not his own, but that of
students preying on other students. Umsted admitted to covering
up the repeated incidents, according to sources close to the
situation, in order, as he explained his motives, to protect the
school's good name. The impropriety of contemplating the
replacement of a man who had spanked female students and staff
members by another fired for covering up multiple cases of sexual
abuse apparently escaped the Arkansas School Search Committee.
Luckily other people in the state were deeply concerned. By
Friday, February 17, 1995, when the four serious candidates for
the job were arriving for their interviews, word began to
circulate that the governor was going to freeze the hiring
process. On Saturday the story of the Umsted candidacy burst onto
the front page of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Here is the
story by Susan Roth that appeared on February 18, 1995:
Finalist Hid Sexual Abuse at Former Job
To be Interviewed for Blind School Chief
A finalist for the superintendent's job at the Arkansas
School for the Blind was fired from a similar post in Illinois
for concealing incidents of sexual abuse at the school.
The chairman of the superintendent search committee said
this week that reference checks on all four finalists had turned
out satisfactorily. But the committee didn't contact any of
Richard G. Umsted's former supervisors, Illinois officials said
Friday.
An independent board runs the Arkansas deaf and blind
schools, and it is to pick a new superintendent Sunday based on
its search committee's recommendations. The state funds the
schools, but doesn't oversee their operations, so problems with
the choice would have no resolution beyond the board.
A bill stalled in a legislative committee would give the
governor authority over the schools' superintendents.
Umsted failed to properly notify Illinois authorities and
parents of at least six incidents where a sixteen-year-old
student molested other students at the Jacksonville school, the
Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services reported.
Another Illinois source said a state police investigation
found forty-five documented incidents of sexual abuse from 1991
to 1994 and even more cases of physical abuse that weren't
properly reported to authorities.
Umsted, the Illinois superintendent for eighteen years,
couldn't be reached for comment Thursday or Friday. He has denied
the state's charges as "misleading and unfounded," but he didn't
challenge them. Sources said Umsted, who was well-respected and
active on the school board and chamber of commerce in the town of
20,000, told others the firing was politically motivated.
The Illinois Rehabilitation Services Department, which
oversees that state's blind school, fired Umsted August 23, 1994-
-the same day Arkansas police charged Leonard Ogburn with
harassment.
Ogburn, the former superintendent of the Arkansas blind
school, resigned a month after four women associated with the
school accused him of spanking and sexually harassing them. He
pleaded no contest to the charges.
Bill Jacobson, the chairman of the blind school's
superintendent search committee, declined to discuss Umsted's
employment history this week. He said the committee checked
Umsted's references, along with those of the other three
finalists.
Whittled from a field of fifteen applicants, the other three
candidates are:
Noel E. Stephens, supervisor of the Southeast Regional
Cooperative of the Arizona School for the Deaf and Blind in
Tucson.
Ivan S. Terzieff, director of educational services at the
Iowa Braille and Sight Saving School in Vinton, who taught at the
Arkansas blind school in 1972-73.
J. Kirk Walter, executive director of Hoover
Rehabilitation Services for Low Vision and Blindness in
Baltimore.
Their applications indicate they meet the basic requirements
for the job, which include eligibility for Arkansas certification
in administration. Umsted, who has reportedly worked odd jobs
since August, listed on his application no reason for leaving his
last job.
"We were very fortunate and happy to have such a qualified
group of people," Jacobson said Thursday. "The committee would be
happy if any of them took the position."
In fact, the committee didn't seek comment from any Illinois
officials who supervised Umsted. Of the five references Umsted
listed with his resume, only one was associated with the Illinois
School for the Visually Impaired.
And that reference was Umsted's assistant superintendent,
who was forced to take a leave or be fired last October after the
state police implicated him in the cover-up, sources said. A
state official said he took an extended medical leave through
June, when he will retire.
Jacobson said he would address Umsted's past Sunday, when
the search committee will present the four finalists to the blind
school's board.
The finalists were to arrive in Little Rock on Friday
evening for private interviews today with the search committee.
The committee then will rank the candidates and present them to
the school's board at 8:00 a.m. Sunday with the recommended
ranking.
At 9:00 a.m., the board will begin private interviews with
the candidates. A decision is expected by mid-afternoon, Jacobson
said.
The nine-member superintendent search committee includes
parents and teachers at the school and representatives of local
organizations for the blind.
Illinois policy required Umsted to report any "unusual"
incidents involving criminal activity, abuse, or neglect to his
supervisor at the Rehabilitation Services Department, to the
state's Children and Family Services Department, and to local law
enforcement.
Melissa Skilbeck, a spokesman for the rehabilitation
services agency, said an internal investigation revealed that
Umsted had reported some incidents involving the sixteen-year-old
but failed to consistently notify authorities and parents of
other incidents.
Umsted reportedly termed the initial incident, when the
sixteen-year-old attacked a nine-year-old boy last May, as
"sexual exploration."
The state police investigation, which ended last fall, found
"serious administrative issues" at the school but no criminal
offenses, Skilbeck said.
Other administrators who worked with Umsted may yet be fired
for their connection with his "serious management deficiencies";
Skilbeck said other "personnel actions are pending."
"I am stunned that he is a finalist," Skilbeck said.
David Postle, an alumnus of the school and a member of its
advisory council and superintendent search committee, echoed her
remarks.
"If I had gotten a job application like that, I wouldn't
have even interviewed the man," Postle said. He said Umsted
threatened to fire the employees who told authorities of the
abuses. Umsted told Postle he had refused to report the incidents
because he wanted to protect "the good name of the school."
"I would have really strong feelings about anyone being put
in charge of the welfare of defenseless children where he had had
that responsibility and failed to exercise it," Postle said.
There you have the article that appeared on the Saturday
that the candidates were in town for their interviews. Not
surprisingly, the front-page story had a noticeable impact on the
proceedings. The Monday, February 20 story by Chris Reinolds in
the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette described what happened next. Here
it is:
Selection of New Chief of Blind School on Hold
State Hiring Freeze Blocks Board Decision
The Board of Trustees of the Arkansas Schools for the Deaf
and Blind postponed selecting a new blind school superintendent
Sunday until the state legislature lifts a hiring freeze at the
schools.
Board chairman Aaron Hawkins said a representative from
Governor Jim Guy Tucker's office told the board Friday that it
should postpone its decision.
Board member Sharon Mazzanti said the hiring freeze was
placed on both the blind and deaf schools to determine if there
were any positions that could be cut.
Mazzanti said Sunday that three of the four final candidates
were good choices. She declined to say which of the three she
favored.
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported Saturday that one
finalist, Richard G. Umsted, was fired from a similar post in
Illinois for concealing incidents of sexual abuse at the school.
But the chairman of the search committee said last week that
reference checks on all four finalists had turned out
satisfactorily. The committee didn't contact any of Umsted's
former supervisors, Illinois officials said.
"I think they (search committee) did talk to an awful lot of
people," Mazzanti said.
An independent board runs the deaf and blind schools. The
state funds the schools but doesn't oversee their operations. The
board has the final say in administrative decisions.
A bill that stalled in a legislative committee would give
the governor authority over the schools' superintendents.
The blind school has been without a permanent superintendent
since August, 1994, when police charged Leonard Ogburn, the
former superintendent, with harassment.
Ogburn resigned a month after four women associated with the
school accused him of spanking and sexually harassing them. He
has pleaded no contest to the charges.
Jim Hill, principal at the high school for the blind, was
named interim superintendent in June, 1994, when Ogburn was
placed on paid leave. Hill will continue to work as
superintendent until the board chooses a permanent replacement.
Hill said the image of the superintendent search committee
has been hurt since it was revealed that Umsted was fired from
his last job.
"People are upset by it. We didn't need it (the negative
publicity)," Hill said.
Umsted failed to properly notify Illinois authorities and
parents of at least six incidents, where a sixteen-year-old
student molested other students at the Jacksonville school, the
Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services reported.
Another Illinois source said a state police investigation
found forty-five documented incidents of sexual abuse from 1991
to 1994, and even more cases of physical abuse that weren't
properly reported to authorities.
Umsted said Sunday after the board's postponement that he's
still a finalist for the position.
Umsted said the search committee knew his background and he
spoke about the allegations and his subsequent firing during his
interview with the board Sunday.
"I had eighteen years of good evaluations, and this whole
thing was a shock," he said. "Nothing was hidden. It was just
politically expedient for me to leave (Illinois)."
Umsted, who was Illinois superintendent for eighteen years,
planned to return Sunday to Jacksonville, Illinois, where he
works at a grocery store.
The nine-member superintendent search committee includes
parents, teachers at the school, and representatives of local
organizations for the blind. Max Woolly, a search committee
member and retired superintendent of the blind school, said the
committee chose four strong candidates.
Woolly said the candidates were told Friday about the
school's hiring freeze.
When asked why the committee recommended Umsted for the
position despite his job record, Woolly said, "Every
qualification he had was among the best."
The finalists arrived Friday in Little Rock for private
interviews Saturday with the search committee. The board
interviewed the candidates Sunday before taking action.
The four candidates are still eligible for the position when
the board fills it. . . .
That's what was being said by the media in Little Rock.
Meanwhile word had gotten back to Illinois that Richard Umsted
was actually being seriously considered for a job in education of
the blind in Arkansas. The following article by Christiann Baxter
appeared on Saturday, February 25 in the Jacksonville Journal
Courier. Here it is:
Ex-blind School Chief Up for Job in Arkansas
The former superintendent of the Illinois School for the
Visually Impaired--who was fired from the position--is a finalist
for the superintendent's job at the Arkansas School for the
Blind.
Richard Umsted was fired from ISVI in August, 1994, for
failing to report cases of alleged sexual abuse at the school to
his superiors.
Bill Jacobson, the chairman of the Arkansas School for the
Blind's superintendent search committee, said Dr. Umsted is one
of four finalists for the job.
Dr. Umsted told the committee why he was fired from ISVI,
said Mr. Jacobson. He declined to say whether committee members
had talked to anyone at ISVI.
Melissa Skilbeck, spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of
Rehabilitation Services [DORS], said no one has contacted ISVI or
DORS for a reference on Dr. Umsted.
Max Woolly, a search committee member and retired
superintendent of the Arkansas school, said Dr. Umsted told the
committee he was fired from his job for allegedly failing to
report sexual abuse but said the firing was politically
motivated.
"Teenagers are going to experiment in a residential
environment," said Dr. Woolly, "You can't stop that."
Dr. Umsted said he told the committee that his firing was
politically expedient for DORS. He refused to say why he believes
it was politically motivated.
The committee found Dr. Umsted "eminently qualified," said
Dr. Woolly. "He's a good man."
Dr. Umsted has been through interviews with the
superintendent search committee and the board of trustees for
Arkansas Schools for the Deaf and Blind, said Mr. Jacobson.
An internal investigation by the Illinois Department of
Rehabilitation Services revealed several cases of student-to-
student sexual abuse at ISVI had gone unreported to DORS, the
Department of Children and Family Services, and the parents of
affected students. Incidents not properly reported include the
inappropriate and unwanted touching of two female students and
the possible sexual abuse of four male students.
The Illinois State Police is conducting a separate
investigation to determine whether any laws were broken but has
not released any findings.
Dr. Umsted has denied the basis for his firing. He is still
a member of the District 117 school board.
The Arkansas Board of Trustees for the Deaf and Blind
Schools has postponed selecting a superintendent until a hiring
freeze ordered by the governor is lifted on the position.
Dr. Woolly said in Arkansas a state position is frozen when
it is vacated. The institution has to justify why the position is
needed before it can be filled, he said. No one had turned in the
proper paperwork to the state yet, he said. He has heard the
hiring freeze will be lifted Tuesday or Wednesday.
The State of Arkansas operates the schools for deaf and
blind students but doesn't directly oversee the operations. The
board has final say about hiring decisions.
A bill that would give the Arkansas governor authority over
the superintendents is stalled in a legislative committee.
The Arkansas Democrat Gazette in Little Rock reported,
February 18, that Dr. Umsted had been fired from his position at
ISVI.
A reporter from the Braille Monitor, a national publication
of the National Federation of the Blind, has been in Jacksonville
to investigate the circumstances around Dr. Umsted's dismissal.
That's how the story was reported in Jacksonville a week
after it broke in Little Rock. It was clearly disturbing to those
who had been following the chronicle of the Umsted firing. The
Journal Courier printed an editorial on Sunday February 26 that
left little room for doubt about the paper's view of the Umsted
candidacy. Here it is:
Disgrace at Arkansas School for Blind
A few months ago, readers might recall, we urged the
legislature to remove the Illinois School for the Deaf and the
Illinois School for the Visually Impaired from the control of the
Department of Rehabilitation Services.
We urged state Representative Tom Ryder to push through
legislation that would put day-to-day governance of the state
schools under boards of trustees appointed by the governor with
guidance from members of the Jacksonville community, especially
from the ranks of employees and students and alumni of the
institutions.
That is what Arkansas does, and it sounds like a good idea,
doesn't it? It would prevent some of the heavy-handedness DORS
has displayed in its handling of the two local schools, and it
would allow the local trustees to keep close tabs on goings-on on
the campus.
However, in practice the Arkansas School for the Blind has
been terribly managed and probably should serve as anything but a
model for us in Illinois.
The school was trying to replace a superintendent who got
canned and convicted in a sex scandal. Dr. Richard Umsted,
himself fired after nearly two decades at ISVI for failing to
report alleged sexual assaults by students, applied for the
Arkansas job and is among the finalists.
What is astounding is that the knuckleheads who are heading
up the search committee there never bothered to contact Dr.
Umsted's employers at DORS to determine the circumstances under
which he left his job at ISVI. Nor did they ask whether or not
DORS or Dr. Umsted's associates at ISVI consider him fit for the
Arkansas job.
Members of the Arkansas search committee essentially
dismissed the allegations against Dr. Umsted--"Teenagers are
going to experiment (sexually) in a residential environment. You
can't stop that," said one--and called Dr. Umsted "eminently
qualified" for the job.
They apparently believe Dr. Umsted's contention that the
charges against him were trumped up and the result of politics.
We might not have any problem with that had they actually
bothered to speak with DORS about the specific complaints that
led to Dr. Umsted's firing or to the Illinois State Police, which
also is investigating what happened at ISVI.
This is the grossest dereliction of duty on the part of the
board that runs the Arkansas School for the Blind there. The
system is probably not one Illinois should emulate in any way.
Subsequent events proved Max Woolly correct. Midweek the
legislature did indeed lift the hiring freeze, and Aaron Hawkins,
who chairs the Board of Trustees of the Schools for the Deaf and
Blind and who is also a member of the American Council of the
Blind, called an emergency meeting of the board with the apparent
intention, according to sources close to the situation, of
ramming through the hiring decision. According to these sources,
two board members refused to attend the meeting, believing that
it was improper for the body to act in haste. When the three
members who did show up settled down to work, it became apparent
that Hawkins was the only one who wanted to resolve the question
that evening. One of the members moved that the meeting be
adjourned and that the question of the appointment of a
superintendent be postponed until the meeting already scheduled
for March 9. The other member seconded the motion, the two voted
in favor, and the meeting ended.
Meantime the Arkansas Legislature was busy developing a plan
to improve the management of the Schools for the Blind and the
Deaf and to consolidate the maintenance, transportation, and
housekeeping departments under the management of the School for
the Deaf. The plan will apparently not be put into effect until
after the new superintendents of both institutions are named and
have started work.
The March 9 meeting of the board of Trustees took place as
scheduled, and the board voted unanimously to offer the job of
superintendent of the Arkansas School for the Blind to Ivan
Terzieff, the candidate who had most compellingly communicated
his dedication to the education of students. The following
article by Susan Roth appeared in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
on March 10. Here it is:
Blind-School Educator in Iowa Chosen for Arkansas Spot
Ivan S. Terzieff will be the new superintendent of the
Arkansas School for the Blind, the school's board of trustees
decided Thursday.
Terzieff, director of educational services at the Iowa
Braille and Sight-Saving School, beat out three other finalists,
including one who was fired from his last job for concealing
incidents of sexual abuse.
Some parents, teachers, legislators, and members of national
blind organizations have expressed concerns about the search
process because such a candidate was considered a finalist.
The school has been in a state of flux since Leonard Ogburn,
the former superintendent, resigned under pressure in September
after he was charged with sexually harassing a teacher. The
scandal left the students and faculty at the school divided and
brought more allegations of long-term mismanagement that are
likely to result in close legislative oversight for the next two
years.
Sherry Bartley, a trustee, said Terzieff was the board's
unanimous choice because he stressed education of children as his
primary concern.
"We felt he expressed that better than any of the other
candidates." Bartley said. "He also said, in a very positive way,
that he looked forward to working with the Legislature to make it
the best school possible. And he will make sure the school is
united. I think he won't allow that division to go on long."
Terzieff said he felt "euphoric" after learning he was
chosen, and that he was not deterred by problems at the school.
"What happened in the past at the school may have created
some problems internally, but they are not problems that cannot
be resolved," he said. "The school itself has a very good
reputation, and given that, the faculty is very good I would
suspect."
Several teachers and members of the blind community were
relieved to hear that Terzieff was the board's first choice.
Terzieff, who taught at the School for the Blind in 1972-73,
has a good professional reputation as a teacher and
administrator, and a record of good relations with consumer
groups for people with vision problems.
There you have it. Is the long, sordid, and tangled story of
poor management and misbehavior at the Arkansas School for the
Blind close to its end? One can only hope so. Much will depend on
the skill, diplomacy, and integrity of Ivan Terzieff. The teacher
whose charges against Leonard Ogburn touched off the explosion in
the first place must still decide whether or not to sue the
school. Her persecution at the hands of some staff members and
several school officials reportedly continues. At the February 19
meeting of the Board of Trustees, for example, the Chairman,
Aaron Hawkins, attacked her publicly, which does not say much for
his intention to resolve the problems that still exist. The
legislature continues to indicate distrust of the school
administration's ability to manage the institution wisely.
Members of the staff, the student body, and the blind community
are divided and skeptical about the school's future. And of
course, the school's accreditation with the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped (NAC) is about to come up for renewal. There is
certainly plenty for Ivan Terzieff to do when he arrives. Once
again the past months have illustrated just how accurately NAC's
good-practice seal reflects its boast of quality service at its
member institutions. If Mr. Terzieff is serious about wanting to
demonstrate that a new day has dawned at the Arkansas School for
the Blind, he could do worse than to sever the institution's
affiliation with NAC. Certainly he must find ways of
reestablishing public confidence in the school. Let us hope he is
up to the job.
[Photo #7 Portrait Caption: Larry Israel]
A LETTER FROM TELESENSORY
As Monitor readers know, in the January, 1995, issue of the
Braille Monitor we printed an article entitled "The Other Half of
the Equation: PC-Based Reading Systems, A Comparative Review."
Subsequently we received the following letter from Larry Israel,
President and Chief Executive Officer of TeleSensory Corporation:
Mountain View, California
February 27, 1995
Dear Ms. Pierce:
In the January issue of The Braille Monitor, David Andrews
presented a comparative review of PC-based reading systems from
Arkenstone, TeleSensory, and Xerox Imaging Systems. In his
article the section on strengths and weaknesses had some comments
about TeleSensory which could present a misleading impression.
David says: "On the negative side, TeleSensory is a company
in flux. The company has changed management twice in less than
two years, and rumors persist that the blindness-products
division will be spun off or sold. Some people have reported
support and service problems with TeleSensory, though we have not
had any such problems. If you ask around enough, you will hear
good and bad stories about any company, particularly the larger
ones."
The best antidote to rumors is facts. As many of your
readers already know, TeleSensory and VTEK (the company I founded
in 1971) were merged in early 1989. TeleSensory was in fact the
acquiring company, and my personal role did not include any
operating responsibilities, although I did serve on the company's
Board of Directors part of the time during the next four years
and remain a major shareholder in the company.
What transpired after that may not be equally clear to your
readers, and so I'd like to provide some factual information
which may be of interest. In late 1992 the Board replaced Dr.
James C. Bliss, the company's co-founder and its President since
its inception, with James W. Morrell. Mr. Morrell had served on
TSC's Board for about four years.
Six months later, on July 1, 1993, I rejoined the company as
Vice President Sales. Later, in January, 1994, I assumed
additional responsibilities as Vice President Sales and
Marketing. My personal motivations were to help the company
overcome various problems it was facing and to protect my
investment as a major shareholder of TeleSensory. Perhaps most
importantly, I missed the industry and the environment which I
had helped establish through VTEK in the early '70's, and wanted
to return to heavy involvement with it.
In mid-July, 1994, Mr. Morrell resigned abruptly and
unexpectedly. TeleSensory's Board of Directors unanimously
elected me as President and Chief Executive Officer of the
company on July 14, 1994, one day after Mr. Morrell's
resignation.
There were some fairly prompt changes made. The company was
reorganized into a Blindness Products Division (BPD) and a Low
Vision Division (LVD). This was a reflection of our belief that
there were significant differences in the needs of people who
were totally blind and those who were partially sighted and in
how we as a company could best meet those needs.
We also believed that we could more effectively focus our
resources on product development, technical support,
demonstrations, marketing, installation, training, and other
aspects of meeting client needs if our staff were organized in a
way which would permit them to pay attention to those differences
in a more effective manner than under our prior organization. One
of the immediate benefits is that we learned some things we were
doing right, but we also learned some things we were doing wrong,
which needed to be changed.
Yakov Soloveychik was hired as Vice President and General
Manager of the Blindness Products Division. Yakov was with VTEK
for eleven years, then with TeleSensory for a year after the
merger and later was President of Baum USA in the Los Angeles
area. At the same time, TeleSensory also acquired rights to
distribute Baum's Braille products in North America.
Our Low Vision Division, being somewhat larger, is managed
by three senior officers for Sales and Marketing, Product
Development, and Manufacturing Operations. Marc Stenzel, who is
Vice President Sales and Marketing for this division, is well
known throughout the industry. For the moment I am personally
serving as Acting General Manager for this Division, in addition
to my responsibilities as President and CEO of TeleSensory
Corporation.
Thus far results have been very gratifying. The company's
operations have been turned around, morale is generally quite
good, and we are working very hard to rebuild our reputation and
bring exciting new products to market. And we do need to rebuild
it, at least in part. I am sorry to say that I think we here at
TeleSensory have fallen down on the job over the past few years,
despite many fine people who work for us. Our reputation for
quality, reliability, and prompt and effective service to our
customers has been compromised and diminished, not through the
actions of any malevolent outside force, but because of our own
shortcomings.
Among our problems was a failure to deal with a Braille-cell
problem of a few years ago in a forthright and candid manner. Our
technical support group, while staffed with some very
conscientious and talented people, was not organized, led, or
motivated in a way which allowed those people to provide support
at the level we would have wished. We have taken major steps to
correct those shortcomings, and we believe the results and
improvement are already visible in the marketplace.
For our slippage in quality and support, I apologize to our
customers. And I pledge that all of us here at TeleSensory will
continue to expend major effort to ensure that we fulfill our
commitments to both our customers and to ourselves. I'm sure we
will continue to encounter some complaints, because perfection is
not attainable. We will work hard to reduce the frequency of
complaints and to continuously improve what we do, within the
context of ensuring that TeleSensory remains a financially sound
organization, so that it is here for years to come.
This brings me back to the reasons why I have written this
letter and why the rumors may be misleading. TeleSensory is not a
company in flux, although it might have been accurate to
characterize it that way as recently as last summer. We are now
solidly organized and well on our way to ensuring that we provide
service and support to the users of our equipment, which is
reliable, of high quality, timely, and cost-effective.
The Blindness Products Division is not for sale, and we have
no plans to spin it off. It would be foolhardy for me to say
"never," but I can assure you that is not being contemplated or
discussed by TeleSensory senior management or by its Board of
Directors.
Finally, one other point I would like to make, which is more
indicative of the "new TeleSensory," if I may call it that. We
are taking an active role to make our products, architecture, and
interfaces more open and available to others in the industry. We
are already one of the largest manufacturers in the world of
Braille cells, which are used by many of our competitors in their
products. Another example: we have recently begun discussions
with other companies who may wish to sell our refreshable Braille
displays in conjunction with their own equipment (for instance,
with a PC-based reading system of their own design), and we will
be encouraging and facilitating that. We will provide interface
specifications, technical support, and a reasonable "resale
discount" to permit other companies to resell our products
through their own distribution networks. In this way we believe
that we will facilitate the availability of assistive devices in
a broader way and will also help spur development of new
technologies to benefit those who are blind, even though the
short-term effect might be to reduce our direct market share.
I realize this letter is quite lengthy, but I hope that it
has been informative and helpful. If you would like to talk to me
or interview me to clarify or expand upon any of my comments
here, I would be delighted to meet or talk with you.
Sincerely,
Larry Israel
President and Chief Executive Officer
[Photo #8 The Holiday Inn Columbia Room is shown filled to capacity with
people occupying all the chairs, sitting on the floor and leaning against the
walls. Caption: More than 500 Federationists jammed themselves into the
Columbia Room for the opening briefing of 1995 Washington Seminar.]
[Photo #9 A crowd of Federationists wait at a table to pick up information.
Caption: Affiliate leaders pick up Congressional committee lists following the
Sunday evening briefing at the Washington Seminar.]
[Photo #10 Judy Sanders retrieves cards from a metal card file while Jan
Bailey uses a Perkins Brailler to take a report. Caption: Jan Bailey takes a
Congressional visit report from a Federationist while Judy Sanders files
completed reports in the Mercury Room.]
REPORT OF THE 1995 WASHINGTON SEMINAR
by Barbara Pierce
With every passing year the Washington Seminar takes on more
and more the character of a midwinter convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. This year Federationists began gathering
at both the National Center for the Blind and the Capitol Holiday
Inn on Friday, January 27. Several meetings were held at the
National Center immediately prior to the seminar as a convenience
to committee members who were already planning to travel that
weekend to the Baltimore/Washington area to talk with their
Members of Congress.
In addition, two day-long seminars took place at the hotel
on Saturday: the annual Midwinter Conference of the National
Association of Blind Students and, this year for the first time,
a seminar for business people conducted by the Merchants
Division. Both these exciting programs culminated in banquets.
Dr. Jernigan addressed the Merchants Division, and Dr. Fred
Schroeder, Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services
Administration, addressed the students.
Early Sunday morning more than a hundred Federationists
clambered aboard buses to drive to Baltimore for tours of the
National Center. The buses were back in time for afternoon
meetings--a legislative seminar for parents of blind children and
one on selling Associates, sponsored by the Associates Committee.
By 5:00 p.m. there wasn't a seat to be had in the meeting
room used for the briefing that officially kicked off the 1995
Washington Seminar and our visits to Capitol Hill. More than 500
Federationists from forty-seven states were ready for action and
eager to begin. President Maurer and Dr. Jernigan brought the
crowd up to date on a number of organizational activities, and
Jim Gashel, Director of Governmental Affairs, described the issue
we would be discussing with our Senators and Representatives and
answered questions. The focus of our concern this year was the
Senior Citizens Equity Act (H.R. 8 in the House and S. 30 in the
Senate). The packet of materials we distributed and discussed is
reprinted elsewhere in this issue.
When the briefing adjourned promptly at 7:00, the crowd
scattered to turn in their appointment schedules, gather
materials, snatch a bite to eat, and coordinate plans for the
following day. A few people even found time to watch part of the
Super Bowl. For the next three days the halls of Congress echoed
to the sounds of canes tapping and harnesses jingling as
delegations of Federationists hurried to appointments. Many
Members of the 104th Congress took time to meet personally with
us and discuss our concerns. Speaker Gingrich told the Georgia
delegation, for example, that he was in sympathy with our
position and would work with us. And many, many others affirmed
their support of our position. There is no doubt that we had an
impact on these legislators. The task facing this Congress is
staggering, but the Members seemed encouraged by our insistence
that, above all, blind people want an opportunity to work and
contribute to the solutions of this nation's problems.
No report on the Washington Seminar would be complete
without a word of thanks to Sandy and John Halverson and the
dedicated crew of people who staffed the Mercury Room, nerve
center of the Washington Seminar. It was here that summaries of
all meetings were taken down in Braille from both phone and face-
to-face reports by team leaders. These were then entered into the
computer, and filed in huge file drawers. It was a massive
undertaking, conducted by a staff of volunteers who were always
pleasant, businesslike, and efficient. At 5:00 p.m. Wednesday the
phone lines were unplugged, the file drawers were closed, the
computer was packed away, and another Washington Seminar became
history.
But in many ways the work was just beginning. Federationists
packed their bags and made their way for the last time through
the construction in the hotel lobby to our waiting cars and cabs.
The serious letter-writing and telephoning campaign was about to
begin.
RAISING THE EARNINGS LIMIT AND PRESERVING LINKAGE:
THE BLIND FIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS
by James Gashel
From the Editor: At the 1995 Washington Seminar, January 29
through February 1, members of the National Federation of the
Blind had only one thing on their minds: Social Security earnings
limits. Two newly introduced bills, S. 30 and H.R. 8, would raise
the Social Security earnings limit to $30,000 a year over a five-
year period for retirees under the age of seventy. The idea is to
encourage seniors to continue to work and enjoy increased incomes
without jeopardizing their Social Security benefits. The plan has
much to recommend it. In fact, for years we have argued for just
such an approach to the earnings limit for Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries who are blind, and for
exactly the same reasons.
Since 1977 earnings limits for retirees and blind people
receiving SSDI have been linked. But the current bills before the
House and Senate propose to break that linkage and leave the
blind exactly where they now are at the same time that retirees
are experiencing a distinct and growing incentive to work while
they continue to receive their Social Security benefits. What
follows is the legislative memorandum explaining the problem and
our solution to it. Along with it is the text of testimony
presented by the National Federation of the Blind before the
Subcommittee on Social Security on January 9. These are the
documents we discussed with members of Congress during this
year's Washington Seminar. Here they are:
MEMORANDUM
Re: Increasing the Social Security earnings limit: a critical
time of decision for blind people
If item seven in the Contract with America is enacted as
proposed, a provision in the Social Security Act for exempting
earnings of blind people and senior citizens to the same extent
will be repealed. The amount of earnings allowed without penalty
for blind persons will remain where it is now, with only marginal
future annual adjustments being made. Meanwhile the earnings
exemption for seniors will be raised by five mandated annual
increases in order to reach $30,000 in the year 2000. The reason
for doing this is to diminish the disincentive of the earnings
limit and to increase work and productivity. By the same
reasoning the higher earnings exemption should also apply to
blind people, who like the seniors are penalized for working.
In voting on the Contract with America, Congress must decide
whether work incentives for blind people are less important than
raising the earnings exemption standard for seniors to $30,000.
Both goals have identical merit and should be given identical
weight. Work, productivity, and the opportunity for more people
to pay taxes would be the result. Accordingly, blind persons are
asking that their need to achieve economic independence through
work not be set aside.
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING LAW
Under an amendment authored by Congressman Archer in 1977,
blind people who have not attained age sixty-five are affected by
the same earnings limit that the Social Security Act imposes on
age sixty-five retirees. Mr. Archer's amendment, establishing an
identical earnings exemption standard for blind people and
retirees, has been law for almost twenty years. Blindness and
retirement age are both defined eligibility conditions in section
216 of the Social Security Act. The disability test--the
inability to engage in Substantial Gainful Activity--is not used
to determine whether an individual meets the blindness criteria
in the Social Security Act. Only medical evidence is used for
this determination.
CONTRACT WITH AMERICA: PROPOSED CHANGES
Item seven in the Contract with America is a bill known as
the Senior Citizens' Equity Act--H. R. 8, by Congressman Jim
Bunning, and S. 30, by Senator John McCain. The modifications to
the earnings limit being proposed include five mandated upward
adjustments in the exempt amount to reach $30,000 of annual
earnings beginning in the year 2000. Section 101(b) of the bill
would specifically exclude blind people from the mandated
adjustments.
The exclusion departs from existing law. The National
Federation of the Blind (along with every other organization
having interest in the blindness field) strongly opposes this
change. The provision would create an earnings limit for blind
people which is far more stringent than the earnings limit for
age sixty-five retirees--a serious change in direction which will
have far-reaching and harmful work disincentive effects upon the
blind.
NEED TO REMOVE WORK DISINCENTIVES
Continuing the existing policy by mandating the adjustments
in the earnings limit for blind people as well as for age sixty-
five retirees will assure that an estimated 104,300 blind
beneficiaries will receive a powerful work incentive. Most blind
people could then not lose financially by working. The mandated
earnings limit changes, if made applicable to blind people, would
be cost-beneficial since, among those of working age, 70 percent
are currently unemployed or underemployed. Most of them are
already beneficiaries. At present their earnings must be strictly
limited to $940.00 per month. When earnings do exceed this exempt
amount, the entire sum paid to a primary beneficiary and
dependents is abruptly withdrawn after a trial work period.
When a blind person finds work, there is absolutely no
assurance that earnings will replace the amount of lost
disability benefits after taxes and work expenses are paid.
Usually they do not. Therefore, few of the 104,300 beneficiaries
can actually afford to attempt substantial work. Those who do
will often sacrifice income and will certainly sacrifice the
security they have from the automatic receipt of a monthly check.
This group of beneficiaries--people of working age who are
blind--must not be forgotten as the debate proceeds toward
modifying the Social Security retirement test. Just as with
hundreds of thousands of seniors, their positive response to the
higher amounts of earnings allowed will bring additional revenues
into the Social Security trust funds.
ACTION REQUESTED
In taking a position on legislation to approve item seven in
the Contract with America, each member of Congress should vote to
ensure that equity in the work incentive policies of the bill
applies, as under current law, to senior citizens and blind
people alike. To achieve this, we ask you actively to promote
striking the exclusionary provision--section 101(b)--of the
Senior Citizens' Equity Act so that an identical earnings
exemption standard for blind people and retirees alike--the
policy of the present law--is maintained.
BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SECURITY
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D.C.
STATEMENT OF THE
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
JAMES GASHEL
DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JANUARY 9, 1995
Mr. Chairman, I am James Gashel. I am Director of
Governmental Affairs for the National Federation of the Blind
(NFB). My address is 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland
21230, telephone (410) 659-9314. I am appearing today along with
Mrs. Betty Niceley, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Kentucky. Mrs. Niceley will summarize this written
statement. Thank you for offering us this opportunity to present
the views of the NFB in response to Social Security earnings
limit issues which have been raised in legislation to fulfill the
Contract with America.
At the outset, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that the
position we are taking concerning modifications to the earnings
limit is shared by every national organization in the blindness
field. The groups in question have entered into a joint statement
of our position, and I am submitting a copy of this statement as
an attachment. I believe that each organization, represented by
the individuals on this panel, is submitting a separate written
statement for this hearing. The organizations involved are listed
at the end of the joint statement. Collectively we represent
people who are blind throughout the United States, professionals
who provide services to the blind, agencies throughout the
country which employ blind individuals in significant numbers,
and agencies in every state which assist blind people in finding
jobs in the competitive labor force. In other words, the joint
statement which we are submitting represents the complete
spectrum of interests from the blind themselves to those who
serve them.
There are over fifty thousand blind people who are members
of the National Federation of the Blind. We have a local chapter
of the Federation in almost every sizable population area in this
country and a state affiliate in all states, Puerto Rico, and the
District of Columbia. In short, Mr. Chairman, NFB is organized
and active in all parts of the United States.
By virtue of its size and scope NFB represents and speaks
for the blind as a collective body. We speak for older blind
persons and younger blind persons as well. The positions we
express in hearings such as these are the result of the
democratic process of debate and decision-making among people who
are blind in the United States. The supreme authority of the
Federation is its National Convention, which occurs annually.
During the convention we openly debate (and approve or
disapprove) a number of policy resolutions. In this manner the
Federation is truly the blind speaking for themselves. It is not
simply an organization speaking for the blind. All of our elected
officers and the vast majority of our members are blind. For
these reasons the NFB is widely known as the voice of the
nation's blind.
This hearing concerns proposed modifications in the earnings
exemption threshold provisions of the Social Security Act. The
legislation which would accomplish the specific changes is known
as the "Senior Citizens' Equity Act"--introduced in the 104th
Congress as H. R. 8.
Blind people have a special concern in relationship to this
subject. Most blind people are sixty-five or older. The
retirement test affects blind retirees in precisely the same way
that it affects all senior citizens age sixty-five to seventy.
But the retirement test also affects blind people under age
sixty-five who receive Social Security benefits.
According to information available from the Social Security
Administration, this latter group is made up of about 104,300
blind beneficiaries. There are in addition approximately 57,000
blind individuals (most of whom are of working age) who receive
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments but do not also
receive disability insurance checks. This adds up to a combined
total of 161,300 blind beneficiaries whose work patterns and
earnings could be significantly improved by work incentives.
Under a provision in section 223(d)(4) of the Social
Security Act, working-age blind individuals are subject to an
earnings limitation which is precisely the same as the earnings
limitation for age sixty-five retirees. This limitation is stated
in section 203(f)(8)(D) of the Social Security Act. The present
limit is $11,280 annually or $940 monthly, which by law is
subject to upward annual adjustments.
The Senior Citizens' Equity Act would change existing law by
creating an earnings limit for the blind which is different from
the earnings limit for age sixty-five retirees. In fact, the
earnings limit for the blind of working age would be far more
severe than the earnings limit which would apply to retirees. For
this reason, while we enthusiastically support the changes called
for in the earnings exemption threshold, we are asking the
Committee and the Congress to remove from the bill the provisions
which would exclude blind people from the work incentives
resulting from the new, higher threshold amounts.
In terms of establishing the point at which an individual
becomes eligible, the Social Security Act treats blindness and
retirement age (age sixty-five) in almost precisely the same
manner. Section 216(l)(1) of the Act presently defines retirement
age as age sixty-five. The definition of blindness is found in
section 216(i)(1)(B). In looking at this definition it is
critical to understand that blindness is not the same as
disability. It may be more accurate to say that blindness under
the Social Security Act is a distinct form of disability having a
definition which is distinctly different from the definition of
disability.
The definition of disability is an "(A) inability to engage
in any substantial gainful activity . . . , or (B) blindness; . .
. ." In the latter case (blindness) the inability to perform "any
substantial gainful activity" is not a defining condition.
Blindness is defined by means of specific visual acuity and field
restrictions. Medical evidence is used to determine whether an
individual has impaired eyesight to the extent of blindness. The
determination is as clear as it is in the case of determining
whether a given individual has reached retirement age.
Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA) is the test for
eligibility for persons who are disabled. In such cases, the SGA
guidelines are applied to determine the extent of the disability
and its relationship to an individual's ability to work. Earnings
are considered, but the SGA guidelines go far beyond that.
Factors such as "comparability and worth of work" tests are also
applied. The purpose of an SGA evaluation is, therefore, to
determine whether the individual is disabled. Disability is
actually defined by an individual's "inability to perform SGA."
The determination of blindness under the Social Security Act does
not depend upon an SGA finding.
Although blindness is defined medically and not by SGA as
just described, there is an SGA guideline for blind people. This
is the earnings limit which is also established for age sixty-
five retirees. Also in Title XVI (SSI) no SGA determination is
made in the case of blind individuals. They are categorically
eligible. This is exactly the same situation for persons who have
reached age sixty-five. They, too, are categorically eligible for
SSI. Of course income and resources may affect eligibility or
payment amounts for any individual. SSI is a means-tested
program, but the point is that there is no earnings limitation
attached to the basic eligibility conditions of blindness or old
age. This is as it should be.
Unlike SSI, eligibility under Title II is not means-tested.
Social Security benefits are paid to wealthy people and to poor
people alike. True to the principles of insurance, not welfare,
income for Social Security beneficiaries can be unlimited. Work
activity is limited. For blind people as well as for retirees
this is a counterproductive policy, and it is so for precisely
the same reasons.
Blindness as we still experience it today has profoundly
adverse social and economic consequences. Therefore, Social
Security benefits should offset these consequences insofar as
possible. The social attitudes about blindness are full of myths
and misconceptions. As a group the blind face an incredibly
devastating set of artificial impediments when they seek to enter
and compete in the labor force. The blind are not just viewed as
unemployed. We are usually considered unemployable.
To be sure, the blind pay a heavy price for this erroneous
labeling. For example, most people agree that over seventy
percent of the employable blind population is either unemployed
or underemployed. If before blindness an individual had an income
of, say, $20,000 annually (not an uncommon income for sighted
individuals), and if after blindness that same individual finds
employment at $12,000.00 annually (not at all an uncommon
experience for the blind), he or she will still not be eligible
to continue receiving Social Security benefits despite the fact
that a substantial loss of income has occurred.
Under prevailing social conditions, blind people are pushed
aside in competition for jobs and social opportunities. This
results in significant lost income which is not replaced by
Social Security. Responsibility for the prevailing attitudes
about blindness does not rest with the blind alone; it is a
general social phenomenon. However, it is the blind members of
our society who currently bear the cost in lost opportunities,
lost jobs, and lost income.
The Social Security system itself presents additional
economic barriers to the full integration of the blind. I am
referring to the direct impact of the earnings limitation. These
are the stark economic realities: under existing law, if an
individual becomes blind and has average monthly earnings which
do not exceed the "exempt amount," he or she will likely draw
Social Security benefits. The individual has every incentive to
remain unemployed and not return to work at all. Why? In the
first place, the beneficiary is undoubtedly not an expert in the
law. The law is complex, and the talk of allowed earnings, trial
work periods, impairment-related work expense deductions, and
extended eligibility is confusing and not generally conducive to
an attempt to resume or continue working.
Ironically, the work incentives for blind people under
Social Security are inversely related to the likelihood that an
individual can engage in productive activity. For example,
persons who are age seventy and older have the maximum incentive
to work--there is no limitation on their earnings. Persons age
sixty-five to seventy are faced with the disincentive of the
earnings limitation, but two-thirds of their earnings are still
exempt. Blind persons under age sixty-five are subject to the
harshest penalty of all--there is an absolute barrier to earnings
over the exemption threshold. If the individual goes to work and
(after a specified trial work period) is earning somewhere in the
neighborhood of $940.00 per month, benefits will be terminated.
Place yourself in the position of a blind person considering
possible employment. Remember that, including dependents'
benefits, the family income from Social Security may exceed
$1,500 per month in many instances. I know a number of blind
people who (believing in the work ethic) would accept employment
offering gross wages at somewhat less than their possible Social
Security income. However, many people are simply not in a
financial position which would allow them to do so. Of course
there are also costs associated with working that any blind
person must consider. These costs may include employment of
readers or drivers or other assistants, which will further reduce
take-home pay. When all of these costs are taken into account,
many individuals find that they cannot sustain the economic
losses which may result from working.
In the example under consideration the annual Social
Security benefit available to the primary beneficiary and
dependents would be approximately $18,000. The blind beneficiary
who, under present law, earns $11,300 ($20 over the limit) would
lose $18,000. Almost anyone that I know of would opt to earn $20
less in order to retain $18,000. This is precisely the kind of
economic choice presented to blind beneficiaries under the
present law.
Taking the example a step further, it is revealing to
examine just how much the primary beneficiary would need to earn,
if working, in order to replace the loss of $18,000 in Social
Security benefits. Using conservative numbers, such as twenty-
eight percent for all taxes (including FICA withholding) and
taking into account the cost of working (transportation, meals
away from home, blindness-related work expenses, union dues,
etc.), I would estimate that the working blind individual would
need to have an income of $27,917, not including child care
expenses. Since the example includes two dependents, child care
expenses can be anticipated. A conservative estimate for child
care would be approximately $4,600. This amount added to $27,917
means that the working blind beneficiary with two dependents in
child care would likely need to have gross income of $32,517 in
order to replace the buying power of the Social Security income--
$18,000--if lost due to working.
The proposal in the Senior Citizens' Equity Act is a phased-
in lifting of the earnings exemption threshold over a five-year
period in order to reach an annual ceiling of $30,000 in the year
2000. This policy should be adopted. If it is adopted, it should
apply to blind people and to age sixty-five retirees alike. That
is the policy of existing law. As I have already said, the
provision in the Senior Citizens' Equity Act which would withhold
from blind people the mandated adjustments in the earnings limit
threshold is a change from existing law and should not be
included in the final bill.
The policy of linking the earnings limit for the blind and
for seniors became law with the 1977 amendments to the Social
Security Act. Mr. Archer, who was at that time the ranking
minority member of this Subcommittee and is now the Chairman of
the full Committee, is the architect of this policy. The
amendment which he offered to create the present linkage was
approved with unanimous Republican support when the conferees met
to resolve differences between the Senate and House versions of
the Social Security Financing Amendments of 1977.
The 1977 bill contained five mandated increases in the
earnings exemption threshold, with automatic annual adjustments
kicking in beginning in the sixth year. Under Mr. Archer's
amendment both blind people and seniors were subject to the
mandated increases as well as to the automatic adjustments. The
Senior Citizens' Equity Act, if adopted, would be the first time
since 1977 that mandated increases in the earnings exemption
threshold have been made. The precedent, as well as the existing
law, clearly establishes that both the mandated increases and the
annual adjustments should apply to blind people as well as to age
sixty-five retirees.
If this is done, the blind person who earns less than
$30,000 could not lose by working. This policy, while not
removing the earnings limit altogether, would cover the vast
majority of blind people. The harsh reality of the choice to
receive benefits or to work would seriously be diminished, and it
would be replaced by an extremely powerful work incentive. The
beneficiaries who respond will become taxpayers, and they will
join the productive ranks of our society. The blind person is
better off being productive. Society in general is better off if
the individual is productive instead of idle--working instead of
sitting at home.
Proponents of the earnings limitation complain that
individuals with high earnings will continue to receive Social
Security benefits. The fact is that the number of blind people
being paid $12,000 a year or more is surprisingly small. Most
blind people do not even work. Approximately 161,300 blind
persons under age sixty-five now receive Social Security or SSI
benefits. They would not be paid more as a result of increasing
the earnings exemption threshold. They would have the maximum
incentive to work, and thousands would begin paying into Social
Security.
By comparison, raising the earnings exemption threshold
would add some blind persons as new beneficiaries, but this would
only be a fraction of the more than 160,000 who are now
beneficiaries. The new beneficiaries would be individuals who
earn more than the present exempt amount but less than $30,000.
Although they would begin to receive benefits, there would be an
overall positive effect on the Social Security system. That would
result from providing a powerful incentive to work to more than
160,000 beneficiaries who would not receive one dime more from
Social Security. Besides, fewer blind individuals would receive
SSI as a result of becoming Social Security beneficiaries.
Overall, there would actually be a positive cost impact on
the Social Security system resulting from increased payments into
the trust funds by working blind beneficiaries. The greater their
earnings, the greater would be the amount that they pay into the
trust funds. Considering the costs and benefits involved, the
provision which would withhold the mandated earnings limit
adjustments from blind people is truly punitive. Information
reported by the Office of the Inspector General for the
Department of Health and Human Services indicates that in 1993
there were approximately 1,700 blind beneficiaries who had
earnings above the exempt amount then in effect. It is fair to
say that many (if not most) of these individuals would continue
to receive benefits while working if the earnings limit threshold
goes to $30,000. The punitive part is that all of these
individuals would lose their beneficiary status if the policy of
linking the earnings limits for the blind and for seniors is
changed.
Mr. Chairman, in concluding this testimony I would like to
restate our long-standing position about work incentives and the
counterproductive impact of the Social Security earnings
limitation. The blind as a group are prepared to work--and work
hard. The disincentives created by Social Security force blind
people into financial dependence. We seek to renounce this
status. We are asking only for the opportunity to lead normal,
self-supporting, independent lives. If there continues to be a
limitation on earnings, those who are subject to it will be paid
to remain outside of the work force. This policy reinforces the
myth that the blind cannot be productive members of society.
Until that myth is changed, we will be subject to the conditions
of ignorance, prejudice, and discrimination which have long kept
blind people out of the mainstream. Mr. Chairman, we are
committed to use work incentives effectively as instruments of
rehabilitation, self-help, and self-support for the blind. On
behalf of the National Federation of the Blind, I thank you.
[Photo #11 Portrait Caption: Joyce Scanlan]
CREATION OF A FEDERATIONIST
by Joyce Scanlan
From the Editor: The keynote speaker at the 1995 Midwinter
Conference of the National Association of Blind Students was
Joyce Scanlan, First Vice President of the National Federation of
the Blind, President of the National Federation of the Blind of
Minnesota, and Executive Director of Blindness: Learning In New
Dimensions (BLIND, Inc.). Here are her remarks:
How many of you are twenty-five years old or older? [a
number of voices respond.] How many are younger than twenty-five?
[many more voices in the shout] How many of you were members of
the Federation in 1970? [one voice] I see that, when I became a
Federationist in 1970, some of you weren't even born yet. I'm
just trying to establish some rank for myself. You're probably
thinking, "She is just another old person who is going to tell us
about the good old days--how hard the old folks had it or how
lucky everyone is today because of everything that was done in
the past." As a history student and teacher I'm a firm believer
in examining the past and paying heed to the lessons it has to
teach, but that is not what I am here to do today.
It has been said that "Change starts when someone sees the
next step." That's how 1970 was for me. At the annual convention
of the National Federation of the Blind that year I really saw
the next step, and as a result all sorts of changes began in my
life. Growing up in the State of North Dakota I had known what
isolation and loneliness were. I knew what being on my own meant.
I knew how to fight my battles (or I thought I did), for I was an
independent thinker and considered myself highly informed on all
matters. Did you know that 85 percent of the population believe
that they are above average? Since that can't be so, some of us
must have a greatly overblown notion of our capacities. I was one
of those folks. I had received a college education past the
master's degree level and had been successfully employed as a
teacher. I was not blind; I only had a visual problem. In my
opinion no one knew I was anything but sighted, so what a rude
awakening I had when I suddenly learned that I was destined to
lose the sight I had and would probably become totally blind.
Suddenly my bubble burst.
My goal had always been to become a college English
professor, but when I faced blindness, that goal became something
seemingly unachievable. My livelihood, career plans, and
independence all appeared to vanish from the horizon. It was not
a happy time. After several skirmishes with the rehabilitation
agency for the blind, I concluded that there was no reason to
expect assistance from that direction. In fact, I had been forced
into the state's one and only training center and was so feisty
and belligerent they had thrown me out after four short weeks.
That's all the training I had. They had determined that I wasn't
really blind. If I lost any more sight, I could come back for
further training.
That was undoubtedly one of the most fortunate events of my
life--being thrown out of that center. I was mean and
uncooperative because they weren't meeting my expectations. All I
wanted was to be persuaded that blindness wasn't a tragedy and
that I could find a way to carry on with my life plans. All they
proved to me was that blindness was the worst thing that could
happen, that I should recognize my limitations, and that I should
become a lifelong rehab client of that agency, which, as you
probably know, was the Minneapolis Society for the Blind. It is
now called Vision Loss Resources, which I think is a better name
for them.
Although today I am grateful for not having been retained at
that center any longer than I was, at the time it was a
disappointment, a rejection. It confirmed all my fears and doubts
about my capacity to have a productive life. In 1970 I had hit
bottom. The National Federation of the Blind Convention came to
my hometown, and I went. I had lots of time to check things out,
but that wasn't why I went. I went because a friend practically
dragged me there after I had run out of excuses.
The convention was indeed a life-changing experience.
Spending four or five days at convention, attending the banquet,
meeting teachers from all over the country, and discussing
interesting topics about blindness with all kinds of well-
informed blind people proved to me that I had been doing
everything wrong and needed to make some drastic changes in my
life. My style of going it alone had not worked and would never
work. Here was an organization I could agree with. The rehab
people really had been wrong about blindness and all its
limitations!
The Federation had a lot to teach me, but at the same time I
was also treated as though I had some value. People seemed
interested in my experiences and even asked my opinion. I learned
that I had rights in the world. It was absolutely reasonable for
me to expect to resume my teaching career. Among others, I met
Jim Gashel, who was a teacher at the time. I met Rami Rabby and
Muzzy Marcellino and many other leaders in the organization. They
actually spent time talking with me, asking about my goals, and
showing genuine interest in what was happening in my life.
The President of the organization at the time was Dr.
Kenneth Jernigan. Although I didn't meet him personally until a
year later, I was tremendously impressed with his leadership, the
manner in which he chaired convention sessions, and the excellent
banquet address he delivered. No question about it, the National
Federation of the Blind had outstanding leadership!
Before joining the National Federation of the Blind, which I
did immediately after that 1970 convention, I hadn't thought much
about leadership. As a child, when my friends and I had gotten
into trouble, the house parents talked about the ringleaders.
They didn't mean it as a compliment. And when you are the only
one in your organization, there isn't much leadership--there
isn't much of anything. But after 1970 I was no longer alone, and
leadership became an issue. One of the first things I did after
becoming a member of the Federation was to read The Man and the
Movement, the biography of Dr. tenBroek, founder and first
President of the organization. From that book I learned about the
history of the organization and about the character of the
organization's leadership.
At the time I joined the Federation the Minnesota affiliate
was very different from what it is today. As a matter of fact,
1995 marks the seventy-fifth anniversary of the founding of the
NFB of Minnesota, so in honor of the occasion we in Minnesota are
undertaking all sorts of special events and activities. We have
been reviewing the old minutes dating back to 1920. The outfit
kept very good records. By 1970 most of the members were well
over fifty years old and had been members since the 1920's, 30's,
and 40's--it sounds like forever, doesn't it. For a long time
they had been concerned that they weren't attracting new members.
As some of you may know, at that time Minnesota had the
dubious distinction of having two NFB affiliates--something that
can't happen any longer. The other affiliate, which is no longer
with us, was having the same problem with membership. When I
joined the NFB, I could have become a member of either affiliate
or perhaps both. I joined the one where something was going on. I
learned about the other affiliate much later. That's another
piece of luck in my life--joining the right affiliate. The
President of the Minnesota affiliate and most of its members were
delighted to have new members. We who joined at that time--and
there were many of us because of the recent national convention
in our state--were welcomed warmly and put to work immediately.
Maybe the members were wearing out and were tired, but they were
very open to our ideas and supported our radical suggestions.
Many of us, myself included, thought it was time to take on
the task of reforming some of the local agencies for the blind.
Our Minnesota affiliate had previously put all its efforts into
operating a home for the blind. The new members weren't
interested in that project, so it was left to the older members.
They in turn supported those of us who were new in addressing
broader issues which affected all blind people.
Together we accomplished quite a bit. By 1972, after I had
been a member for less than two years, I was elected First Vice
President of our affiliate. I won by just two votes. The same
year we changed our name to the National Federation of the Blind
of Minnesota. In 1973, when the then president decided not to
run, I was elected president in Minnesota. I was running against
one of the older people in the organization, and this time I won
by thirty-nine votes. And that's all I remember about elections.
There have been countless changes in Minnesota since those
days. We no longer have the home for the blind. We have one
National Federation of the Blind affiliate. The then younger
people have become the older people, but most of all we are a
very active part of a nationwide movement of blind people. I met
both Dr. Jernigan and our current President, Marc Maurer, in
1971. I would have to characterize most of my early Federation
activities as bungling, trial-and-error efforts. However, after I
met Dr. Jernigan and became a state president, more support and
teaching were available. Someone was there to bail me out when I
made mistakes or to help me not make mistakes in the first place.
I truly came to appreciate the leadership of our national
President.
He gave me my best rehab lesson. I was a member of the First
Seminar, which was a leadership seminar that took place over
Labor Day weekend in 1973, just three months after I had become a
state president. The first evening, when we were all going out to
dinner together, someone suggested we go to a place
Federationists called the Charcoal Pit. We were told that we
would be able to select and grill our own steaks. I had the
impression that in the Federation we should speak up about how we
felt, so I did. I said I didn't like the idea because I had never
before grilled a steak to my liking. Dr. Jernigan very calmly
said, "Oh well, we'll help you." I was suddenly terrified. I
prayed that, when we got to the Charcoal Pit, he would have
forgotten what I had said. Of course, that didn't happen. He
immediately escorted me to the refrigerators, where all the
steaks were kept. We began examining all the shapes and sizes of
steaks and ultimately made a selection of which one to grill. He
was so enthusiastic and seemed to be having such fun that I began
to enjoy the venture myself.
With the steak selected, a plate, and a long fork we
approached the big pit. He said, "Now throw your steak out there;
just toss it out there." I did, thinking all the time about
losing the steak forever in the fire. After a short while, Dr.
Jernigan said, "All right, reach out with your fork and find the
steak and put it on the plate." I did. Then he showed me how to
turn the steak over. I was so relieved he had done it so I
wouldn't have to touch that hot meat. However, he flipped the
steak back and said to me, "Now you do it." I should have known
he wouldn't let me off so easy. Then we grilled the steak on the
other side, and I became more comfortable handling it.
I ate the steak and enjoyed it too. Everyone was having such
a good time, and for the first time I actually enjoyed a steak
that I had cooked. Then Dr. Jernigan asked me to grill a second
steak for him. It must have been okay because he ate it and
didn't complain. That was my first rehab lesson--the only one I
ever had. Dr. Jernigan was a teacher to me; yet he treated me as
an equal. I learned so much about myself, about leadership, and
about dealing with blindness just from that one experience.
Now that I have been a state president for more than twenty-
two years and have served as a national Board Member, Secretary,
and now First Vice-President, I recognize and value the trust
that has been placed in me by my colleagues in the National
Federation of the Blind. I've had good guidance and direction
from everyone around me. I have learned from President Maurer,
from Dr. Jernigan, and from everyone in this room, even from all
the people who formed the original statewide organization of
blind people back in 1920. While most of us wouldn't agree with
much of what they did in the early days, they created and built
an organization which was there for all of us when we needed it.
I know that, when I was a child, when I was in college, when I
was teaching, and when I was struggling to deal with blindness,
other blind people were busy founding a movement to help me and
others like me. I'm grateful and pleased that they did that. But
even more, I feel a strong sense of responsibility to do as they
did to keep this movement strong and vibrant for the next
generation of blind people, who will have much less struggle than
I did because of the work that we have done.
I recently came upon a list of the qualifications of a good
leader, and it goes something like this: 1) a leader must be able
to dream; 2) a leader must communicate; 3) a leader must be
honest; 4) a leader must remain enthusiastic (I remember how I
was impressed with Dr. Jernigan's enthusiasm as he taught me to
grill a steak); 5) a leader must remain focused (as we go along,
think about how these characteristics apply to you and to the
National Federation of the Blind); 6) a leader must foster unity;
7) a leader must be a good role model; 8) a leader is inspiring;
and 9) a leader must have a sense of humor (I don't think that
means just being able to tell jokes because I don't measure up in
that respect. A sense of humor is something broader). How do you
think you measure up as a leader? All of us are the beneficiaries
of much that has gone on in the past. How each of us handles our
role in the Federation in coming years will make a great
difference in our lives and in the lives of blind people not yet
born.
Dale Carnegie said, "Any fool can criticize, condemn, and
complain; and most do." Happiness is a conscious choice, not an
automatic response. You can choose happiness and meet the
responsibilities placed on you by that choice, or you can hide
away and pretend that you're satisfied with others' doing the
work, and you can remain on the sidelines complaining,
condemning, and criticizing. Because you are here today, I know
you have made the right choice. All of us here are involved in a
great and powerful organization. Because of what has been done by
our predecessors, we have many benefits. Services are available
to blind people to overcome the problems of blindness. We have
incentives to go to work rather than simply remaining on
disability benefits. We have choice provisions in our rehab
system to allow us to choose which programs we will use for
training, but most of all we have the National Federation of the
Blind--a vehicle through which we can speak out and be heard. We
can share what we have with all blind people. And through our
collective efforts we can truly change what it means to be blind.
[Photo #12 Portrait Caption: Chris Boone]
DEMONSTRATING LEADERSHIP BY EDUCATING OTHERS
by Christine Boone
From the Editor: The theme of the 1995 Midwinter Conference
sponsored by the National Association of Blind Students was
leadership. One of the speakers who addressed the conference was
Chris Boone, a second-year law student at Creighton University in
Omaha, Nebraska. Despite her busy schedule as wife, mother, and
law student, Chris was elected this year to serve as President of
the International Moot Court Bar at her law school. Chris has
found a number of ways in her daily life to provide leadership in
her community and to demonstrate the capacity of blind people.
This is what she had to say:
Last August my telephone rang. I wasn't really ready to go
back to school yet. But this cheerful voice on the other end of
the line said, "Chris, this is Tara. We're having a NOW rally
(the National Organization for Women) in Omaha on Saturday. I
think you have a message. Be there."
I thought, "Okay--." I just showed up, and after I got
there, I found Tara and said, "What do you want me to talk
about?" I didn't have any idea what she wanted me to say.
"Well, we're celebrating the seventy-fifth anniversary of
women's right to vote, and it occurs to me that perhaps blind
women don't enjoy the same kinds of freedoms most other women do.
I think that's a message these people need to hear." So I gave
that message and then went home.
The next evening my telephone rang again. This time the
caller was my classmate Tory. "Chris, the dean has been talking
to me. We've got these first-year students coming, and we have to
talk to them about what it's like to be a non-traditional
student. I don't feel very non-traditional, but they think I am.
I know you don't feel very non-traditional, but they think you
are too, so would you come and talk about being a non-traditional
student?"
So I went off and talked about the way it is when you study
and you have little children at home who need a mom. When you
walk in the door, they don't want to hear about torts or
constitutional law. On the other hand, when you get into class
the next morning, your professor doesn't want to hear about how
you read The Little Engine That Could last night. What are you
going to do? I told them that I didn't have all the answers, but
here were some of the things I did know.
By this time it was the first week of school, and I was
standing in line in the malt shop to get my cup of coffee,
without which I cannot go on! Ann came up to me and said, "Come
over here; I want to talk to you." We sat down, and she said, "I
need your opinion. What do you think? Should I shave my head?"
I said, "Well, that depends on why you want to do it, Ann."
She said, "I know that you're a feminist, but you are also
one of the more reasonable people around here, and my sister-in-
law is shaving hers. She says that, if I'm going to be a woman
who really stands for women's rights, I have to do it. I just
don't know--what do you think?"
I said, "Well, if that's your reason, then think again,
because that's the worst reason I've ever heard for doing
anything!" It seems to me that, if you're a woman and you're
proud of it, you should not feel that you have to go off and
shave your head and wear a suit and tie and look like a guy to be
equal. That's just my opinion."
Then along about September we were having negotiations
tournament, and my partner and I were doing our negotiating. We
thought we had gotten an awesome deal for our client. We came in
to be judged. It was the final round, so of course there was an
audience. There were five judges. One of them was about a hundred
and eight. He said something like, "I graduated in 1940, and I've
been practicing law ever since."
I thought, "Uh-huh, and how awake are you when you're
listening to your clients?" He and all the other judges were
giving commentaries on what they thought of us. They said things
like: "Team 2, you were too conciliatory, too nice, too friendly.
What do you think this is? You got to get a good deal for your
client! And Chris, I saw you looking at your watch. Never let
them see you sweat; and, if you're looking at your watch, they
think you're nervous, so don't do that again!"
I had thought this was a negotiation. I thought we were
supposed to be friendly to each other and talk about what it was
our client wanted. I thought, "Maybe I don't have the right idea
about this." As I reflected on that, I thought back to the year
before when my partner and I had been in the Regional Client
Counseling Competition in Kansas City. I remembered what that
judge had said to us. She said, "I think your client was nervous
because you are blind, and I really think you need to justify to
your client why as a blind person you can be a lawyer. Why should
clients come to you?" With all my training and all my involvement
in the National Federation of the Blind, I was still unprepared
for those comments. What I wanted to say was: "This is a
competition about counseling clients and doing the best job you
can for them. It's not about justifying myself to anyone. If we
only have a half hour and I'm supposed to talk about why as a
blind person, as a woman, as a student over thirty I can be a
lawyer, my half an hour is gone." But I didn't say any of those
things to her because they tell you not to talk back to the
judges if you want to get anywhere!
When I left there, I felt rotten about what had happened.
But in thinking about the judge who told me not to look at my
watch and not to be so conciliatory, I decided maybe we had made
some progress. After all, he didn't say anything about blindness.
It didn't worry him that I was a blind person and that I was in
there negotiating for my client. He said to me the same things
that he would have said to any other person and did say to other
people who were in my position.
I thought back to my first week or two or three of law
school and the way I would sit in class and wonder how in the
world I was ever going to do it, and the way I would sit alone in
the lunch room. Nobody came and talked to me during the first
couple of days. I sat there and worried about how I was ever
going to get along. Then I would go off to the restroom and cry
because I just didn't know what to do.
Then I began to think about all the other blind people who
had done these things before me, and I thought to myself, "I know
better than this. I've been in the Federation forever, and I
should know how to handle these situations." I realized somewhere
during this process that I needed to be myself. Being in the
Federation was not necessarily going to give me all the answers,
but it sure as heck was going to show me where to find the
answers if I didn't have them myself.
I began talking to my friends in the Federation about some
of the feelings of inadequacy I was having. Everyone was so
encouraging and supportive that I finally started to chill out a
little bit and realize that all my fellow first-year students
were running into the restroom crying too, because they didn't
know if they could do it either. And a lot of them were sitting
in the malt shop at lunch time not talking to anybody because
they didn't know what to say, and it was so stressful, and they
were going to get called on in torts, and what were they going to
say? So I began walking up to people and saying, "Hi. I'm Chris.
Who are you?" Lo and behold, they answered me. When none of my
professors called on me in class, I went to their offices and
said, "You can call on me. I might not know the answer, but you
can call on me." Then I left and thought "You've got to be a
maniac!"
Then there was the day in civil procedure when I raised my
hand and the professor called on me. I just knew I had the answer
to this question. I gave my answer, and I justified it. And he
said to the class, "Don't write that down!"
I thought, "Well I guess that's exactly what he would have
said to anyone else." Sometimes being treated equally isn't what
we think it's going to be: when I talked in contracts, and the
professor said, "Is that what you think?"
I said, "Yes sir."
"I don't know why you would think that; I don't know why
anyone would think that!"
I said to myself, "I guess you asked for this."
When we got back from that terrible counseling competition
in Kansas City, the faculty helped me to write a letter to the
Client Counseling Committee explaining that blind people and
people using wheelchairs and people who are deaf are going to
participate in these competitions. It is not necessary or
acceptable to comment or judge them on their disabilities but on
the way in which they compete.
We sent that letter to the Client Counseling and
Negotiations Board, and in their new bylaws there is a section
saying that you can't judge people on those personal
characteristics with which you are not familiar. But remember, it
isn't Chris Boone that has done these things; it is really the
National Federation of the Blind, because when I was eighteen or
nineteen and first joined this movement, I never had the nerve to
talk to anyone. I spent my life walking around looking at the
ground because I didn't use a cane, putting my nose against the
page because I never used Braille, never saying boo to a fly for
fear someone would contradict me or argue with me.
It's the Federation that has taught me how to travel with
the long white cane and how to read and write Braille and how to
have confidence in myself. It's the Federation which continues to
support me and all of us when we come to a mountain that we think
is too steep to climb or come up against a judge that we think is
just too irrational even to be on the planet. I would urge all of
you to go away from this place with the Federation spirit in your
heart and know that there is another brother or sister at the
other end of the phone to call and support you, to share love and
encouragement whenever you need it.
I TEACH ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
by Suzanne Whalen
From the Editor: Suzanne Whalen, who is a talented second
grade teacher, was one of the speakers at the 1994 meeting of the
National Association of Blind Educators in Detroit. This is what
she had to say:
From my own personal experience I can assure you that blind
teachers must have confidence in themselves and be willing to
assist others. I student taught at both the elementary and
secondary levels so I would have two credentials. At the same
time I was working on a master's degree and maintaining a 3.8
grade point average. When I had completed those requirements, the
only course I had left to take was teaching reading methods. I
was told that I could not take that class. The professors in the
department of education were adamant that a blind person could
not teach reading, and that was that. Without this course, I
could not get my elementary credential. I took my problem to the
college counselor, who referred me to the NFB of Texas. The state
president then referred me to one of the members of the National
Association of Blind Educators. By the time I finally talked to
the blind educator, I was sure that I was getting the run-around
and was about to give up.
This educator told me about Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act and assured me that I could and would teach
reading. A letter explaining the law was sent to the dean of the
university, who promptly called me in and said that there must
have been some terrible mistake on the part of the department of
education. As a result I took that reading class and got my
credential along with all the other students.
Even since getting my job I have had to educate a number of
people about what the blind can do. There are still many
administrators who need to be educated about the civil rights
provisions in disability law and the rights provided to blind
educators. One of my principals actually went downtown to
ascertain how I could be fired.
On her own she next decided that a blind educator required
the services of a teacher's aide. I had never had one and had
never requested one. As it turned out, the principal had a friend
whose daughter needed a job. This girl was hired without my
knowledge. The poor girl had not graduated from high school, but
I was told that she would be working with me three hours each
day.
I was advised that I should not refuse to work with her, so
I found her a job doing busy work down in the library, far from
my classroom. In the meantime at my request President Maurer
wrote a letter explaining that I was not required to accept an
accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. When the
superintendent received the letter, the aide vanished. We are
certainly lucky that we have the NFB to set people straight.
Not long ago I attended a workshop on reading conducted by
experts. The head expert said her method required sight. I
ignored her and simply did what the other attendees did. She was
livid. She informed me that she was the expert and that I should
know my limitations. I said that she was definitely not an expert
on blindness and suggested that she might benefit from learning
something about her own limitations. I told her that in this
situation I was the expert on blindness and that we would all be
better off if she stuck to the things she knew something about.
Her attitude improved when she realized I was not going to be
told what I could and could not do.
Teaching is deeply rewarding, and I love it. Each fall I am
assigned a whole class of little children who speak only Spanish.
By June they have mastered a great part of the English language.
All blind educators must understand that they have a right to be
in the classroom. As members of the National Association of Blind
Educators we know our rights, and we know that the field of
education is open to the blind of this great nation.
[Photo #13 Portrait Caption: Tom Bickford]
THE NATIONAL LITERARY BRAILLE COMPETENCY TEST:
WHAT'S IN IT, AND WHO SHOULD TAKE IT?
by Thomas Bickford
From the Editor: Tom Bickford is a long-time leader in the
National Federation of the Blind. He is also an employee of the
National Library Service and a frequent contributor to these
pages. This time he tells us what it is like to take the Literary
Braille Competency Test. His description is accurate and his
advice sound. One of his points should perhaps be reinforced.
When he warns test-takers to circle the Braille errors in the
proofreading section, he is stating the exact truth. Circling the
word in which the error occurs will be counted wrong, unless the
entire word is the error. The suggestion has been made that some
blind test-takers may be incapable of circling only the cells
they intend. Mary Lou Stark, Acting Head of the Braille
Development Section of NLS, says that allowances are made when
incomplete circles are drawn by blind applicants, though she
warns that, if additional cells are frequently included in
incomplete circles, they will be counted as errors. Perhaps some
sort of accommodation will have to be developed for marking
errors in this section when the individual has difficulty with
fine motor coordination. According to Ms. Stark, the problem and
workable solutions are definitely under consideration. In any
event, here is what Tom Bickford has to say:
Yes, this is the test devised by the Library of Congress,
National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped, at the request of the Committee on Joint
Organizational Effort. It measures the literary Braille
competence of teachers of blind children and adults. But enough
for long names and general purpose.
I decided to take the test for two reasons. First, I wanted
to speak from personal experience when talking with state and
federal legislators about including successful completion of this
test in the regulations affecting the certification of teachers
of blind people. We still have work to do on that point in
Maryland, and I know that's true of other states as well. Second,
fewer than two hundred people have taken the test so far, which
is a small number for validation studies. I was glad to be one
more statistic. I hope that other Braille users will decide to
take the test. Passing it would provide an impressive credential
for blind people who act as advocates in IEP meetings.
In a Maryland legislative hearing in September, 1994,
opponents of the test (teachers afraid of submitting themselves
to testing and some of their blind friends) disparaged the test
by calling it "invalid." Validation studies of the test will soon
begin, and until that process is complete, it is accurate to say
that the test is not yet validated, but that is a very different
thing from claiming that it is "invalid." I would have hoped that
college-educated teachers could understand the difference.
So let me tell you about the test and how to take it. It can
be administered in either Braille or print. There are three
general sections. Part one calls for transcribing print or
uncontracted Braille into Grade II Braille using both a slate and
stylus and a Braille writer. When doing this section, use all the
Braille rules, and be sure to follow all test instructions
exactly. For example, the directions say to use a twenty-seven-
cell line for the slate transcription. If your slate has twenty-
eight cells, you may wish to cover the last row with heavy
masking tape. You are allowed to use a Braille eraser, but
remember that any erasure felt by the person scoring the test
will be counted as an error. You may use a print or audio
dictionary to help in hyphenating words. A sighted monitor is
allowed to assist a blind applicant with this task.
Part two calls on your proofreading ability. Simply read the
passage and use a pen or pencil to circle the many Braille errors
imbedded in the text. It is important to circle only the cells
involved in the error, not the entire word.
Part three is multiple choice. You must identify certain
contractions and rules of usage. A few of the questions are
rather tricky, but others are dead giveaways.
In general I believe NLS has constructed a good, medium-
level test. You need to know Braille pretty thoroughly to pass,
but this test is nowhere nearly as detailed as the last lesson in
the transcribers' or proofreaders' course.
This is a power test, not a speed test. You are allowed as
much as six hours plus breaks. There is enough time to make and
correct errors. When I turned in my transcribing section, I
included three false starts. On one of them I got most of the way
down the page before making an incorrectable mistake. "What a
place to make an error!" I said to myself as I reached for a
fresh sheet of paper. Even at my rather slow pace of reading
Braille, I had time to proofread my own transcription and go
through the other parts twice.
If you plan to take the test, NLS wants to know that you
have fulfilled one of the following: completed the NLS
proofreading or transcribing course through lesson fourteen;
successfully passed a college-level course in Braille; or have at
least five years' experience using Braille.
The candidate is responsible for arranging an appropriate
test location and monitor and for covering associated costs, if
any. You provide your own Braille paper and writing equipment.
You must also return the test materials to NLS by certified
delivery. NLS will want to approve all arrangements before
sending test materials, so allow at least six weeks for the
process.
Upon request NLS can send you a detailed description of the
test and all requirements for taking it. A sample test, which is
similar but shorter, is now available. You can take and fail it
without its counting against you. If you fail the full-length
test, you must wait six months before a retest, six more months
before the second retest, and another year before the third
retest. Along with your third application you must also include
evidence that you have taken more instruction in Braille.
Test scoring is rather strict. Your transcribing must be
neat and accurate. You must be able to find and accurately
identify the errors imbedded in the proofreading section. Your
knowledge must include the contractions and rules of usage in the
multiple choice section. If you fail one section, you have failed
the entire test.
You and one designee will be informed of your test results.
And, if your work was good enough, you will receive a certificate
saying you have demonstrated competence in literary Braille. For
further information contact the Braille Development Section,
National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped, 1291 Taylor Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20542,
(202) 707-9307 or (800) 424-8567.
CHICAGO NOTEBOOK
by Stephen O. Benson
As you make preparations for the 1995 convention in Chicago,
you will find certain information useful, perhaps critical. At
any rate, the information in this month's Chicago notebook should
make your stay in the city much more pleasant.
Transportation
Chicago has two major airports, O'Hare Field and Midway
Airport. Virtually every major airline in the United States
serves Chicago. If you make your reservations sufficiently early,
the air fares you get should be attractive.
There are several forms of ground transportation from O'Hare
field to the downtown area. Taxi service costs about $25 for one
person. For each additional person there is a charge of fifty
cents.
Shuttle service from O'Hare to the Hilton and Towers via
Airport Express is $17.75 one way per person and $25.00 round
trip per person. The cost for each child under twelve is $6.50.
For those who travel light and have a nose for adventure, the
subway from O'Hare field to the Jackson and Dearborn stop, where
one must transfer to a Number One bus (eastbound on Jackson) the
cost will be $1.75. Remember to ask for a transfer at the O'Hare
train station.
For Federationists arriving at Midway Airport, one-way taxi
service is approximately $20 for a single person and fifty cents
for each additional person.
The Airport Express rate from Midway is $10.75 one way and
$19 round trip. Each child under twelve will cost $6.50. Coupons
will be available at the NFB of Illinois information desk giving
you a dollar off on a one-way Airport Express run.
For those arriving by Amtrak, taxi service is about $6 for
one person with an additional charge of fifty cents for each
additional person. Federationists traveling to Chicago by
Greyhound can expect to pay about $5 for cab service to the
Chicago Hilton and Towers.
Wheel Chair Rental
Wheel chairs are available for $45 for the week from Keeler
Pharmacy, 4201 W. Lawrence, Chicago, Illinois 60630, (312) 736-
5483. Ask for Bud or Al. If you or someone in your party will
need a wheelchair, you must make your own arrangements for this
rental.
[Photo #14 A pagoda-style building looms in the background of a busy street
scene in Chicago's Chinatown. Caption: The flavors and sounds of the Far East
are only minutes away from the Hilton and Towers Hotel in Chinatown.]
Wander Chicago
In last month's Monitor this year's tour package was
described in detail. We urge you to make tour reservations as
soon as possible. We expect some tours will have higher demand
than others. You should not assume that tickets will be available
at a later date. In addition, the Illinois affiliate is preparing
a brochure featuring points of interest that are accessible by
one bus ride or one subway train ride. This brochure will be
available at the NFB of Illinois information table.
Food for the Spirit
The Federation family has a variety of needs, not the least
of which is spiritual. Please check the NFB of Illinois
information desk for the names and addresses of houses of worship
for all faiths within a reasonable distance from the hotel.
To Satisfy Your Palate
Now that we have assured you of food for the soul, we must
also put you on notice that the Illinois affiliate is preparing
an extensive restaurant guide, highlighting restaurants whose
cuisine and prices run the gamut from economical and casual to
putting on the dog.
Canine Care
Guide dog users should check with the NFBI information desk
for details of dog food, exercise areas, and veterinary care. We
will also provide plastic bags for clean-up.
Greeters
In an effort to make you feel as welcome as you feel in your
own home, the Illinois affiliate will greet you as you check into
the hotel and provide all reasonable assistance. If you have
special needs, we will try our best to assist you to find
appropriate resources. We cordially invite you to come to the
Illinois suite so that we can introduce ourselves and our city to
you Chicago-style. This will undoubtedly be our largest
convention ever, and we want to make sure that everyone has a
good time.
Don't forget to make your hotel reservation as soon as
possible. Write to Hilton and Towers Hotel, 720 S. Michigan
Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60605, Attention: Reservations; or call
(312) 922-4400. While you are about it, make your tour
reservation as well.
Watch these pages next month for more information about
Chicago.
1995 CONVENTION ATTRACTIONS
From the Editor: Every year's National Convention is an
absolutely unique event. The agenda items, the exhibits, the new
friends and business acquaintances: all these give each
convention its own character and significance. Some activities
lend a luster to the convention in part because they do take
place every year and provide helpful fixed points in the whirl of
events. In this category are the meetings of the Resolutions
Committee and the Board of Directors, the annual banquet, and the
many seminars and workshops of the various divisions and
committees. Here is a partial list of activities being planned by
a number of Federation groups during the 1995 Convention, July 1
through 7. Presidents of divisions and committee chairpeople have
provided the information. The pre-convention agenda will list the
locations of all events taking place before convention
registration on Sunday, July 2. The convention agenda will
contain listings of all events taking place after that time.
[Photo #15 Della Johnson talks with Janet Bixby about her art, while Fred
Bixby and Tina Blatter confer at another table. Caption: At the 1994 Blind
Artists' Exhibit there was plenty of time for visitors to examine artworks and
talk with artists. Here Della Johnson discusses art with Janet Bixby while
Fred Bixby and Tina Blatter converse nearby.]
Art Exhibit
This year's convention will take place in a hotel which is
within easy walking distance of most of the city's downtown area.
With this in mind the artists' group is planning an exhibit for
the community as well as the convention. Instead of a half-day
exhibit in the hotel, we will have a two-week exhibit in Daley
Plaza beginning July 1.
In the heart of the downtown area, Daley Plaza is known as a
site of quality art exhibits and cultural events. The exhibit
will be visible from the street, and thousands of people every
day will be reminded that the NFB is in town and that its blind
artists can do strikingly good work. And of course there will be
much more time for conventioneers to see the exhibit.
NFB artists have also been invited to present a panel
discussion at the Museum of Contemporary Art on what blind
consumers want from museums. Staff members from all area museums
and galleries will be invited.
Janet Bixby is once more coordinating the exhibit and is
eager to hear from all artists who wish to show their work. We
will be better able to display pictures and large sculptures than
we have been in previous years, but the planning will have to be
much more carefully done. Therefore, if you want to show your
work, please call Janet at (703) 722-4712 or write her at 523 N.
Braddock Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 as soon as possible
and not later than June 1. Indicate your medium, the number of
pieces you hope to bring, and their size. We expect that this
will be our best exhibit ever and that, in addition to providing
pleasure for conventioneers, it will have a positive impact on
the public's image of blindness.
Finally, there will be an artists' lunch and meeting at noon
on Tuesday. We hope this year to have some serious conversation
about the future direction of the group.
Blind Industrial Workers of America
The Blind Industrial Workers of America (BIWA) plans to sell
split-cash drawing tickets at the convention for $1 apiece. The
drawing will be held banquet night.
Second Annual Braille Read-A-Thon Scheduled for Chicago
On Saturday, July 1, 1995, the National Association to
Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB) will sponsor the second annual
Braille Read-A-Thon at the annual convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. Last year in Detroit more than forty
Braille readers from all over the nation gathered to read pledged
pages or contribute pledged Braille reading time, and together
they raised over $3600. One half of this money went to the NFB,
and one half went to NAPUB. If you are a Braille reader and would
like to help raise funds for the NFB and for NAPUB, please write
to Betty Niceley, President, National Association to Promote the
Use of Braille, 3618 Dayton Avenue, Louisville, Kentucky 40207 to
receive an information packet and sponsor sheets, or you may call
Ms. Niceley at (502) 897-2632. All current members of NAPUB will
automatically receive an information packet and sponsor sheet.
This year the Braille Read-A-Thon will take place from 9:00 a.m.
to 1:00 p.m. to allow participants the opportunity to attend
other pre-convention events on Saturday, July 1. Our goal this
year is $10,000, and we need all Braille readers to participate
to promote Braille in the Greater Chicago area. Additionally,
door prizes will be available for participants, and the names of
lucky winners will be drawn at the NAPUB meeting.
[Photo #16 Two little girls play in the child care room. Caption: Laura Wolk
of Pennsylvania and a friend investigate the toys available at NFB Camp.]
General Child Care Information
The following schedule for NFB Camp, the very special
convention activity for children, is always subject to change
depending on the convention schedule, availability of workers,
funds, etc. A schedule will be available at convention when you
register your children for NFB Camp. Remember also to check daily
for any changes to the schedule.
As far as we now know, child care will be available from
8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, July 1, including lunch. On
Sunday it will be available only during the evening meeting of
the Parental Concerns Committee. It will also be available Monday
through Friday during daytime convention activities and Thursday
evening during the annual banquet. NFB Camp will be closed Monday
through Friday during the lunch hour, and children must be picked
up immediately following the morning session.
NFB Camp is not an ordinary child care service. It is a
special opportunity for children who are blind or who have a
blind family member to interact with each other and with blind
adults. Mary Willows, the volunteer director of NFB Camp,
organizes activities to maximize this interaction. At the 1994
NFB Camp, for example, she arranged for blind artists to come in
and conduct craft and art activities with the children. Other
blind adults, such as a blind horticulturist, also came and did
special projects with the children.
Mrs. Willows (who is an experienced educator and the blind
mother of two children) and many other members of the Federation
put in many volunteer hours each year at NFB Camp so that the
convention can be an enjoyable and enriching experience for every
member of the family.
Parents are asked to make the following donations for NFB
Camp activities: $50 for the week (including the banquet) for the
first child and $25 for each additional child; or $10 per child
per day and $10 per child for the banquet night if you do not
want to register for the full week. Parents will also be charged
a fine for late pick-ups at the noon recess and late-day
closings. There may also be additional fees for optional day-
trips. Trips and fees will be announced when you register or
check in your children at the NFB Camp room at the convention.
Parents who cannot contribute the entire suggested donation
should contact Mary Willows to discuss the contribution they can
make. Mrs. Willows will also accept pre-registrations for NFB
Camp. Contact Mrs. Willows at 3934 Kern Court, Pleasanton,
California 94566, (510) 462-8575. She will need your name,
address, and phone number; the names and ages of your child(ren);
and a brief description of any special characteristics or needs
of your child(ren).
Mrs. Willows will not locate or solicit babysitting jobs for
interested teens, but she will pass prepared information on to
parents who use NFB Camp. Contact Mrs. Willows for more
information.
[Photo #17 Gary Posch speaks to Kathleen Spear with the help of an interpreter
who signs into Kathleen's hands. Caption: Gary Posch and Kathleen Spear
converse at the 1994 convention with the help of Kathleen's interpreter.]
Committee on Concerns of the Deaf-Blind
The National Federation of the Blind Committee on Concerns
of the Deaf-Blind is planning three meetings during Convention
week in Chicago this year. All meetings will take place at the
Chicago Hilton and Towers and will begin at 7:00 p.m.
On Saturday, July 1, we will hold a seminar on assistive
listening devices. On Monday, July 3, our meeting will focus on
communication techniques for volunteers and members. The general
business meeting will be Wednesday, July 5. We may decide to have
a deaf-blind breakfast one morning during convention. We will
determine this in the near future. There will be a deaf-blind
table in the Convention Hall.
For further information contact Joseph B. Naulty,
chairperson, 1800 N.E. 43rd Court, Oakland Park, Florida 33308,
or call (305) 772-1825.
Diabetics Division
The NFB Diabetics Division will hold our yearly
conference/business meeting on Monday evening, July 3, beginning
at 6:30. This year's keynote speaker will be a registered
dietician with expertise in diabetes food management. Pertinent
dietary information relevant to diabetics will be discussed.
Plan, prepare, and be rewarded. This year's convention will be
great!
Hear Ye, Hear Ye, A Raffle
The Diabetics Division of the National Federation of the
Blind reaches out, providing support and information to thousands
of people. Because operating this valuable network costs money
and because producing the Voice of the Diabetic requires that we
generate funds, the Diabetics Division has elected to hold a
raffle, which will be coordinated by our treasurer, John Yark.
The grand prize will be $500, and the name of the winner
will be drawn on July 6, 1995, at the annual convention banquet
of the National Federation of the Blind. Raffle tickets cost one
dollar each, but a book of six may be purchased for five dollars.
Tickets may be purchased from state representatives of our
Diabetics Division or by contacting the Voice Editorial Office,
811 Cherry Street, Suite 309, Columbia, Missouri 65201, telephone
(314) 875-8911. Anyone interested in selling tickets should also
contact the Editorial Office of the Voice of the Diabetic.
Tickets are available now. Names of those who sell fifty tickets
or more will be announced in the Voice.
Please make checks payable to the National Federation of the
Blind. Money and sold raffle ticket stubs must be mailed to the
Voice office no later than June 16, 1995, or they can be
personally delivered to Raffle Chairman John Yark at this year's
NFB convention in Chicago. This raffle is open to everyone. The
holder of the lucky raffle ticket need not be present to win.
Each ticket sold is a donation, which helps keep our Diabetics
Division moving forward.
Dialysis
During this year's National Convention in Chicago, dialysis
will be available. Individuals requiring dialysis must have a
transient patient packet and physician's statement filled out
prior to treatment. Conventioneers should have their unit contact
the desired location in the Chicago area for instruction on what
must be done.
Unit social workers should also contact the Shearer Program,
American Kidney Fund, 6110 Executive Boulevard., Suite 1010,
Rockville, Maryland 20852, telephone (800) 638-8299. Shearer will
pay the Medicare 20 percent co-payment (approximately $30) of
transient dialysis, as well as any physician's fees for
treatment. The program, however, does not cover the drug
Erythropoietin, chart readings, or lab work.
If Shearer is not used, individuals must personally pay the
approximately $30 not covered by Medicare. If patients wish
reimbursement, receipts must be sent to the American Kidney Fund
Shearer Program no later than two weeks after the last day
dialyzed.
Dialysis centers should set up transient dialysis locations
using the Shearer Program far in advance. This helps assure a
location's being reserved for anyone wanting dialysis.
If conventioneers do not have Medicare but do have Medicaid,
Shearer will pay $200 towards the cost of dialysis each year.
Here are some dialysis locations:
1. NEO Medica Dialysis Center, Inc., One East Delaware,
Chicago, Illinois 60611, (312) 266-9000. Location is fairly close
to the convention hotel. To schedule, call patient representative
Marie Mason, (312) 654-2785.
2. NEO Medica Dialysis Center, 640 W. Washington, (312) 386-
9050.
3. NEO Medica Dialysis Center, 51 E. Superior, (312) 266-
9000.
4. Lincoln Park Dialysis Center, 2051 N. Sedgewick, (312)
348-0101.
5. Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Northwestern Dialysis
Unit, 250 East Superior, (312) 908-3327. The location is fairly
close to the convention center.
6. Hyde Park Kidney Center, 1439 East 53rd Street, (312)
947-0770. The location is approximately fifty blocks from the
convention center. Taxi fare is about $20, so pooling will
minimize cost. This unit claims to be able to accommodate ten to
fifteen patients with adequate notice. Contact Ruth Ann Riley.
Please remember to schedule dialysis treatments immediately
to insure space. If assistance is needed, contact Diabetics
Division President Ed Bryant at (314) 875-8911. See you in
Chicago.
Human Services Division
The Human Services Division will meet from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00
p.m. on Monday, July 3, 1995. Currently at least two panels are
scheduled. One discussion will be on the topic of using your
choice of reader when taking licensing or educational tests.
Included in the discussion will be the legal implications of
using the reader of your choice. The second panel will discuss
persons who have worked in the human services field in unusual
jobs and how they dealt with attitudes toward their blindness
while serving their clients. Another discussion will be on
producing a video tape of blind persons working in the human
services field for presentation to professional boards and
potential employers of blind people. If you have questions or
need further information, contact Doug Elliott at (515) 236-3369
or (515) 236-3366.
[Photo #18 A large audience sits listening attentively. Caption: There was
hardly an empty seat to be found at the 1994 JOB seminar.]
Job Opportunities for the Blind National Seminar
Do you need more information on how to succeed in your job
search? When you think about your job prospects, do you crave
some recharging of your emotional battery? Do you wish that
someone who knows that blind people do regular jobs would put on
a job seminar and do it for free? Okay, we will.
The 1995 National JOB Seminar will take place in the Chicago
Hilton and Towers on Saturday, July 1, from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m.,
sponsored by the National Federation of the Blind and the U.S.
Department of Labor.
This year JOB is paying special attention to the growing
profession of customer service representative. Some such jobs pay
$5 per hour, and some start at $11 per hour plus benefits. Top
blind-adult-training-center instructors and blind employees will
share their tips for success in this growth industry of the
'90's.
That's not all. In its fast-moving three-hour program, JOB
will pack in blind speakers from many different lines of work.
Check out their tips for success. One agenda item features
members from a single NFB chapter who, in just two months, have
helped six fellow members to find decent work!
Come meet your kind of people--folks who know how to get
things done. Ask questions of those who have been where you are
and succeeded. Network! Build up your personal think tank
Rolodex. You'll meet good people to call on for help when you are
back home and get stuck. Bring copies of your resume. Keep your
notebook handy. Pick up valuable JOB publications at the seminar
and on the JOB Table in the Exhibit Hall. Job seeker,
professional job developer, or employer--this seminar will help
you.
Who's eligible? Are you a legally blind resident of the
United States and looking for work? Then you are eligible for a
free subscription to the only taped job magazine in the country,
the JOB Recorded Bulletin. To get started, (call JOB at [800]
638-7518 (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST) and ask for a JOB Sample
Pack. This package includes a copy of last year's national
job seminar, a copy of the latest bulletin (both on 2-track
cassette), a JOB Application Form, a JOB Publication Order Form,
and a one-page explanation of the program. Borrow any ideas you
hear from other blind Americans that will fit your job search. We
share what works. (Counselors--you are eligible for a sample
package, too. Please call, or write on your agency's letterhead.)
JOB Networking Breakfasts: In addition to its annual free
seminar, JOB offers exciting networking breakfasts during NFB
Convention Week (July 1 to 7). Each breakfast is BYOB (Buy Your
Own Breakfast), begins in the hotel coffee shop at 7:00 a.m., and
offers a friendly gathering of like-minded people. Job seekers,
job developers, employers, parents, and others who want to talk
jobs are welcome, too. JOB Breakfast Coordinators take
reservations, keep the conversation on topic, and help everyone
get a chance to speak. You may reserve a seat at any Networking
Breakfast by calling JOB ([800] 638-7518) or by calling the
specific breakfast coordinator. You may go to as many of these as
interest you. Here is what's lined up so far:
SATURDAY
The Second Annual JOB Breakfast for First-Timers.
Attending your first convention? As a job seeker with no time or
money to waste, do you have questions about how to get the most
out of the multitudes of events at this large convention? You can
start your networking fast at this easy-going breakfast amidst
friendly people. Coordinator, Lorraine Rovig. Call JOB at (800)
638-7518, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., EST, to register.
SUNDAY
JOB's Sunday Breakfast for Job Seekers. Each morning of
convention except the last, JOB holds a general talk-fest
breakfast. All blind job hunters who want to brainstorm their
searches over breakfast are invited. Coordinators: Lorraine Rovig
(call JOB) and various JOB State Coordinators (to be announced).
JOB's Other Breakfast for First-Timers. Just got in
yesterday for your first NFB convention? Join us, ask questions,
meet good people. We'll help you plan ways to access the most
education (and fun) you can have in a week. Coordinator Loraine
Stayer (a JOB Field Service Network Volunteer for New York),
(516) 868-8718.
JOB's Breakfast for Blind Travel Instructors. Are you
teaching blind people to travel with the long NFB cane? Would you
like to? Come share your tips with us. Coordinator Russell
Anderson, travel teacher at BLIND, Inc., Minnesota, (612) 872-
0100.
The Third Annual Science & Engineering (S&E) Breakfast.
You say you're a life scientist or a technophile and nobody
understands you when you get on your favorite topic? At this
breakfast everybody will speak your language. Coordinator John
Miller, California, President, S&E Division of the NFB, (619)
587-3975. Preconvention reservations are especially important for
this breakfast in order to make sure that there is enough space.
MONDAY
JOB's Monday Breakfast for Job Seekers (same as Sunday's).
JOB's Third Annual Breakfast for Braille proofreaders and
transcribers. Coordinator, Mary Donahue, Texas, (210) 826-9579.
JOB's PASS Breakfast, Let's talk about funding your
dreams. This expert runs her own business as a PASS (Plan for
Achieving Self-Support) writer and consultant. Coordinator: Nancy
Ford Winters, Indiana, (317) 547-7286.
JOB's Sixth Annual Blind Lawyers Breakfast. Whether you
are an "esquire," a paralegal, a legal secretary, an employee in
some other legal field, or a wanna-be, you're welcome to join in.
Coordinator Bennett Prows, Washington, President, National
Association of Blind Lawyers (NABL), (206) 821-7619.
JOB's First Breakfast for Medical Transcribers and Typing
Cousins. Where do you work? Whether home, clinic, hospital,
social work office, or police department, let's talk. Coordinator
Janet Triplett (MT from Oklahoma), (918) 438-3231.
TUESDAY
JOB's Tuesday Breakfast for Job Seekers (same as Sunday
and Monday).
JOB's First Annual Entrepreneurs' Breakfast. Have you
started a home business? Want to? Let's talk about it.
Coordinators and entrepreneurs Connie Leblond, Maine, (207) 772-
7305, and Maureen Pranghoffer, Minnesota, (612) 522-2501.
The Fourth Annual Blind Artists Luncheon and Meeting,
(noon to two). Does this one draw you? Coordinator Janet Bixby,
Virginia, (703) 722-4712.
WEDNESDAY
JOB's Wednesday Breakfast for Job Seekers (same as Sunday,
Monday, and Tuesday).
JOB's Third Annual Breakfast for Blind People in Medical
Fields. OT, MD, RN, MT, RT, PT, LPN--whatever your initials,
you're welcome to talk shop. Coordinator Janet Lee, Diabetic
educator at BLIND, Inc., Minnesota, (612) 872-0100.
JOB's Second Annual Green Thumb Career Breakfast.
Horticulturalists and others interested in selling what they grow
are invited to network at this one. Coordinator Pete Donahue,
Texas, (210) 826-9579.
THURSDAY
JOB's Last-Chance Breakfast for Job Seekers (same as
Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday)
FRIDAY
JOB's Invitational Networking Breakfast for Service
Providers. Coordinator, Lorraine Rovig, JOB, (800) 638-7518 (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST).
A special note for counselors and job developers: This makes
sixteen formal networking breakfasts, plus one luncheon,
organized for the purpose of helping blind job seekers help
themselves. JOB assists with formal and informal networking all
week long at this largest convention of blind Americans.
Counselors and job developers are invited to come, observe, ask
questions, develop contacts, and increase their fund of practical
knowledge that will greatly assist their clients back home.
[Photo #19 Marion Gwizdala stands at the microphone playing his guitar and
singing. Caption: Marion Gwizdala takes part in the 1994 Showcase of Talent
sponsored by NFB Music Division.]
Music Division
The Music Division will conduct its annual meeting on Sunday
evening, July 2. We plan to cover the following agenda items:
Sandy Hargrove of Texas will tell us about some of her musical
experiences in prison ministries. Greg Trapp of New Mexico will
discuss important points of copyright law. A representative from
the National Library Service Braille Music Section will give us
an update on what's happening in the Braille music scores and
circulars world. We also hope to conduct a workshop on stage
presence for interested musicians. This will probably be the
final part of the division meeting on Sunday.
The Division will again sponsor its popular Showcase of
Talent this year. It will take place on Tuesday, July 4. The
deadline for registration for performing is the noon recess on
Tuesday. The registration fee for members of the Music Division
is $2, and that for nonmembers is $3. Those who do not register
during the division meeting Sunday evening can do so by speaking
to Linda Mentink in the Wisconsin delegation on the convention
floor Tuesday morning. Again this year the Showcase of Talent
will be divided into three categories: composition, amateur
performance, and professional performance. First prize will be
$100 in each category, and second prize will be $50.
National Association of Blind Educators
The National Association of Blind Educators (NABE) will hold
its annual meeting on Monday, July 3, at 3:00 p.m. This year we
will focus on the blind educator in the variety of teaching
settings of the 1990's. What are our expectations for our
careers, and what should we expect from administrators, parents,
and students?
The choices of jobs from preschool to the university are
much different from what they were some years ago. In the past
everyone respected educators, and administrators did what they
were paid to do. Now, in too many settings the educator is
responsible for everything which occurs there. The educator has
been expected to cure the ills of society.
If the educator is paid to educate, then it is up to us in
NABE to find our rightful place in this new profession. Blind
educators with much experience at all levels of education from
preschool to the university level will share experiences and
techniques. Small group leaders will give each meeting attendee a
chance to express ideas and opinions. We will also discuss how to
deal with many negative factors in the educational work place.
Good self-esteem is essential for long-term psychological well-
being. As blind educators we must learn our rights as well as our
responsibilities. The ADA may assist us, but the skills and
techniques needed by the blind educator are defined and explained
at our meeting.
Even if you are not presently working in the field of
education, come and join in our discussions, and perhaps you will
become a part of the educational profession.
National Association of Blind Lawyers
The National Association of Blind Lawyers will hold its
annual meeting and seminar on Monday, July 3, 1995. Blind
attorneys, law students, and other interested persons will come
together to discuss the hot issues of the day regarding blindness
and the law. While the agenda is not yet final, we plan to
schedule speakers on a wide range of topics, which may include
the treatment of persons with disabilities by bar associations,
provision of accommodations during bar examinations, and
techniques of an efficient practice. We are working to provide
material in such a way that continuing legal education
requirements are met for virtually every state.
The seminar and meeting will be held beginning at 1:00 p.m.
We will conduct a short business session to discuss the progress
and goals for the NABL during the coming years. If you have an
interest in the law or are a blind lawyer, join us at this year's
annual meeting. If you want further information or have ideas for
the Association, contact Bennett Prows in Kirkland, Washington,
(206) 821-7619.
The National Association of Blind Students
This July the National Association of Blind Students will be
more active than ever. For starters our annual meeting will be
held on Sunday evening, July 2. The seminar will be a time for us
to come together once again to learn from one another as well as
to meet new friends and greet the old. This year the meeting may
very well take on a different character. If you think you've seen
it all, just wait and see.
Being students, we can hardly stay in one place for long. We
love having fun, and we love being creative. That's why a lot is
in store for the upcoming convention. The annual meeting will be
just the beginning.
How would you--yes, you--like to become more physically fit,
raise money for the National Student Division and our
Federation's National Treasury, and win prizes all at the same
time? Well, you can do just that. Last year we tried a new idea.
It was called the "Steps to Freedom." Quite literally, we raised
funds by climbing flights of steps, and the resulting resources
have enabled us to advance our cause even further and thereby
come that much closer to freedom and full equality for the blind
of this country. In twenty-four hours we raised almost $1,000.
How much more can we raise if we start this far in advance?
We will be climbing stairs throughout the National
Convention, and in the meantime we will be collecting sponsors.
During Convention, as individuals reach certain goals, they will
receive certain prizes. This will be a fund-raiser in more ways
than one, and we're really looking forward to hearing from eager
and enthusiastic Federationists who would love to join us. If you
wish to participate, please send your name, address, and phone
number to Ollie Cantos, President, National Association of Blind
Students, 1420 Queen Summit Drive, West Covina, California 91791-
3949, or call (916) 424-2226, extension 3019.
Is there more? You bet there is. How does several hundred
dollars in cash sound? How would you like to have some of that
long green in your pocket? Well, it could happen. For details
write or call Ollie.
But wait. Is there yet more? The answer is a definite yes.
But the secret cannot be given away just yet; you'll have to come
to Convention to find out. If the suspense is really getting to
you, here's a hint: the thing itself will put you in suspense.
We all have much to do before National Convention as well as
during the great annual event. Since we are all students of life,
in one sense all Federationists are part of the Student Division.
So in that spirit, fellow students from near and far, see you in
Chicago!
National Association of Guide Dog Users
The annual meeting of the National Association of Guide Dog
Users will be held on Saturday, July 1, from 1:15 to 5:00 p.m.
Registration will begin at 12:30 p.m., and the meeting will begin
promptly at 1:15. The seminar, "A Guide Dog in Your Life," will
be held Sunday, July 2, from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m.
The following topics will be addressed during this seminar:
attractions of smaller training schools, school policy and
practice with respect to safe street-crossing, school public
relations materials and videos and their impact on public
attitudes about blindness, the Hawaii quarantine, zoo policies
about visitors' use of guide dogs, and state division activities.
Grant Park is across the street from our hotel. Arrangements
are being made to use part of this grassy area for dog relief. Of
course it will have to be kept clean. Instead of relying on hotel
or park personnel to maintain it, we hope to hire outside workers
to do the job. This should result in a more pleasant facility for
owners and dogs alike. In 1993 we voted to have each dog owner
pay $25 for use of the relief area throughout the week. We
encourage all guide dog owners to cover this cost if at all
possible. The fee is payable at division activities early in the
week. Owners who miss these opportunities for any reason can pay
Priscilla Ferris, Division Treasurer and President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Massachusetts, later in the
week. She can be found at convention sessions in the
Massachusetts delegation.
Questions about the relief arrangements or other guide dog
matters can be directed to Paul Gabias at 475 Fleming Road,
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, V1X 3Z4, (604) 862-2352.
National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science
The 1995 meeting of the National Federation of the Blind in
Computer Science will be held on Monday, July 3. Registration for
the meeting will begin at 12:30 p.m. Although plans are not yet
final, a few things can be said about the meeting. For one thing,
certainly more than one program item will be devoted to a
discussion of the graphical user interface (GUI), which has of
late caused some concern among blind computer users who feel
their jobs are threatened by it.
We will also have a program item dealing with public access
terminals equipped with touch screens. These devices are
beginning to be used by various governmental agencies as a means
to provide so-called greater public access to their services.
When you consider that these terminals are equipped with touch
screens and voice output that has very little to do with telling
the user how to locate a particular control, the term "access" in
this context is particularly ironic. We will be hearing from the
Trace R&D Center, which has developed an interesting prototype
talking touch screen. Trace is interested in building in design
features helpful to blind consumers--consumers who comprise a
large cross section of society in their ability to use computers
and their capacity to deal with computers and computer-like
devices.
We may hear from the companies marketing screen-reading
programs for Microsoft Windows. We are fortunate that the number
of such companies seems to be growing each year. We may also ask
Microsoft to tell us what it has done in the past year to improve
our ability to use its operating systems and software.
Potential meeting attendees should be warned that NFB in
Computer Science meetings are not for the faint of heart--
technologically speaking. Some techies like to come to our
meetings to talk shop. Be prepared to hear technical terms thrown
about like so much confetti. I refer to such arcane phrases as
"building a protocol between the application layer and the
operating system layer," "accessing a Web Server," "associating
icons with text strings," and so forth.
So, if this hasn't turned you off, come to the 1995 meeting
of the National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science. For
further information about the meeting and other computer-related
matters, contact Curtis Chong, President, National Federation of
the Blind in Computer Science, 20 Northeast 2nd Street, Apartment
908, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413, Email: curtisc@winternet.com,
Evening Phone: (612) 379-3493.
NFB NET Training Seminar
No matter where you turn today, you are likely to hear
references to the information superhighway. With all this
interest many blind people feel the need to get and use a modem
so that they aren't left out.
We in the National Federation of the Blind have had our own
Information Superhighway since June 1, 1991, in the form of NFB
NET, our computer bulletin board service (BBS). That was the date
when NFB NET officially went on-line.
Once again this year we will be holding a training session
for NFB NET users. The session, which will be held on Saturday,
July 1, from 2:00 p.m. until 5:00 is designed for new modem
users, for people who haven't accessed NFB NET before, and for
people who want to learn more about the capabilities of our BBS.
Topics to be covered will include telecommunications basics,
using your modem and communications software, registering for NFB
NET, navigating around, reading and entering messages,
downloading the Braille Monitor and other files, finding files,
setting up off-line reading facilities, and more. David Andrews,
Systems Operator (SysOp) of NFB NET, will also answer your
questions.
If you don't know what the above paragraph means and you
would like to, perhaps you had better attend the annual NFB NET
training session on Saturday, July 1, starting at 2:00 p.m. See
you on-line.
[Photo #20 Claudell Stocker teaches Braille to parents of blind children.
Caption: Claudell Stocker instructs Kevin and Antoinette Hatton in the use of
the slate and stylus.]
The National Organization of Parents of Blind Children
"The Benefits of Growing Up in the National Federation of
the Blind" is the title of the annual seminar sponsored by the
National Organization of Parents of Blind Children, Saturday,
July 1, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Registration begins at 8:00 a.m.,
and the registration fee is $5. This fee will also cover the cost
of all special workshops--such as the Beginning Braille for
Parents workshop--sponsored by the NOPBC during the convention.
The keynote address is titled "Blindness: What Does it Mean
in the Mind of a Child?" It will be delivered by Ramona Walhof, a
former preschool teacher, blind businesswoman, and mother of two
sighted children. Other speakers will zero in on the subjects of
low-vision children, sighted siblings, other relatives of the
blind child, and sighted children of blind parents. Also on the
agenda is a panel of blind and sighted children, youth, and
adults discussing the impact of the NFB in their lives.
The afternoon session will be comprised of a number of
concurrent workshops. See the Spring, 1995, issue of Future
Reflections for the details.
Several exciting initiatives regarding the creative use of
toys and play activities for children are being developed. We
hope to kick these off at convention with some special
demonstrations. Stay tuned! We will announce any developments as
time allows through our state and local parent divisions and
chapters.
From 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday there will be a
convention orientation session for blind youth. This session
provides students (grades six through twelve) a chance to get
together early in the convention, which allows them time to begin
forming friendships. It is also a structured opportunity to meet
interesting and competent blind adults. The adult counselors will
take the youth out in groups to familiarize them with the layout
of the hotel and convention site. The counselors will also lead
discussion groups, organize get-acquainted activities, and
familiarize youth with the NFB and the NFB convention schedule.
On the day of the parent seminar we are planning a field
trip to Kiddie Land, which is a scaled-down, kid-size amusement
park. It is specially designed for younger children. The fee,
which includes admission to Kiddie Land, unlimited rides at the
park, transportation, and lunch, is $15.00 per child. Once again
Carla McQuillan, President of the NFB of Oregon, has volunteered
to organize and lead the field trip. Carla owns and operates a
Montessori preschool program. She has extensive experience as a
teacher and administrator, and she is also a parent.
Since the number of children who can be accommodated for
this trip is limited by space available on the bus and by the
ratio of volunteer workers to children, we urge you to pre-
register your children for the Saturday, July 1, day trip. The
volunteer workers, by the way, are mostly blind parents,
teachers, and students who are willing to donate some of their
convention time to helping your children enjoy convention too.
Children under the age of five and older children who choose not
to register for the Kiddie Land trip are invited to register for
NFB Camp for the day.
From 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. on Saturday evening the National
Organization of Parents of Blind Children and the National
Association of Blind Students will sponsor Family Hospitality
Night. Bring the kids, relax, and meet other parents. We will be
using the NFB Camp room, so there will be plenty of toys and
space to keep the kids occupied. Teachers of blind children and
blind teachers will be there too, to talk informally with parents
about educational concerns.
The annual meeting of the National Organization of Parents
of Blind Children will take place on Monday, July 3, from 1:00 to
5:00 p.m. At this meeting we meet and hear from parents from all
over the country. We discuss local and national projects (such as
our Braille Readers are Leaders contest), elect officers, listen
to a presentation from the 1995 Distinguished Educator of Blind
Children award winner, accept committee reports, and discuss
activities of our state and regional parent divisions and
chapters. This year we also have Mr. Christopher Craig as a
special guest speaker. Mr. Craig, a former NFB scholarship winner
and a doctoral student in special education, has been
investigating how blind and visually impaired children emerge
into literacy and how the family affects that process.
On Tuesday evening, July 4, from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. we will
conduct an IEP workshop entitled "How to be an IEP Advocate for
Yourself and Others." The Individualized Education Program (IEP)
process continues to be the key element in planning a good
education for a blind or visually impaired child. That is why we
conduct this workshop at convention year after year. And year
after year we have a consistently high attendance. This year we
will be discussing specific strategies for Federationists who go
to IEP meetings as advocates for others. Although pre-
registration for the workshop is not required, we urge you to
preregister this year so we can prepare the proper number of
handouts in print, large print, Braille, and recorded formats.
Those who pre-register will have first shot at the prepared hand-
outs in the media of their choice.
For more information or to pre-register call Barbara Cheadle
at (410) 659-9314 or evenings at (410) 747-3472.
Public Employees Division
The Public Employees Division of the National Federation of
the Blind will meet at 1:00 p.m., Monday, July 3.
The federal employment picture is, to put it nicely, fluid.
Many agencies are downsizing, others are rumored to close, and
others will be hiring. The famous, or is it infamous, SF-171
employment form is no longer used. Personnel offices are
disappearing. Government is being reinvented.
Times of change are times in which those who are prepared
can take advantage of the change and improve themselves. Our
speaker will discuss how best to market yourself in the post-171
era. How do you find out about federal jobs when there is no
personnel office? What should you put on your resume? With no
standard resume form, how do you know what each agency wants to
know? Can you apply for a job by faxing a resume? Is there still
a selective placement program? Should you say you are blind? What
are your rights during downsizing? As usual, we will invite three
employees to discuss their public-sector jobs.
If you have questions or suggestions for additional
speakers, please contact John Halverson, President, National
Federation of the Blind, Public Employees Division, 403 West 62nd
Terrace, Kansas City, Missouri 64113, telephone (816) 426-7278
(work), (816) 361-7813 (home), and CompuServe 73132,153.
Science and Engineering Division
The Science and Engineering Division meeting is shaping up
to be jam-packed with exciting information. From microbiology to
mathematics, members know more science than I can hope to
understand. Find out how it is done at the division meeting. This
will be a hands-on seminar. Highlights include presentations of
original scientific research by blind colleagues and what works
for the blind in grasping and relating visual data. Come learn
how the blind succeed in college science and engineering courses
and how blind scientists get ahead on the job.
The Science and Engineering Division is launching its
mentorship program this year. If you are a student in the
sciences and want to spend a day with a blind professional in
your field or if you want to meet an enthusiastic, entertaining
Federationist who holds an opinion on most scientific matters,
this program is for you. To sign up as a mentor or protege,
contact John Miller, Division President, by E-mail
jamiller@qualcomm.com or call (619) 587-3975.
Social Security Seminar
An outreach seminar (Social Security and Supplemental
Security Income: What Applicants, Advocates, and Recipients
Should Know) will take place on Wednesday Afternoon, July 5. The
purpose of this seminar, which will be conducted jointly by the
National Federation of the Blind and the Social Security
Administration, is to provide information on Social Security and
Supplemental Security Income benefits for the blind. Seminar
presenters will be Sharon Gold, Member of the Board of Directors
of the National Federation of the Blind and President of the NFB
of California, and J. Kenneth McGill, Special Assistant to the
Associate Commissioner for Disability, Office of Disability,
Social Security Administration.
Writers Division
The Division will conduct a workshop from 1:15 to 4:30 p.m.,
Saturday, July 1. The major topic will be announced later. At
approximately 2:45 p.m., time will be devoted to readings of
poetry and short story fiction. All Federationists are invited.
Both a book auction and a gemstone auction will be held
during the convention by the Division. The book auction will take
place at the conclusion of the annual meeting at approximately
4:45 p.m. On July 3 at 9:00 p.m. the division will conduct its
gemstone auction, in which unmounted stones will be sold. The
book auction will feature books donated and autographed by
authors and is an excellent opportunity for augmenting personal
collections or for buying gifts.
With registration beginning at 1:15 p.m., and the meeting
starting at 1:30 p.m., the Division will present a program
concentrating on the writing of children's literature. Items of
business, including elections, will be conducted throughout the
afternoon with the biannual elections scheduled at approximately
4:15 p.m.
Lori Stayer will discuss the Division's publication, Slate
and Style, while Jerry Whittle will tell us about the Division's
new book, now nearing publication. The meeting will be chaired by
Tom Stevens.
[Photo #21 Portrait Caption: Ed Eames]
FINAL SETTLEMENT IN THE DOLLAR RENT A CAR CASE
Monitor readers will remember that in June, 1993, we
reported on the problems Toni and Ed Eames had in late 1991 when
they tried to rent a car from Dollar and have a friend drive it
for them on a trip. The Eameses brought suit against Dollar and
have finally received a settlement that should resolve this
problem for all blind people attempting to do business with
Dollar in the future. Here are the pertinent paragraphs of the
settlement, which was signed by a U.S. Assistant Attorney General
and took effect on January 4, 1995:
Actions to be taken by Dollar:
A. In order to afford services to individuals with
disabilities, and to individuals with visual impairments in
particular, Dollar Operations and/or Dollar Systems, as specified
below, agree(s) to implement the following changes in its/their
policies pertaining to the rental of vehicles on the effective
date of this Agreement for those actions identified at
subparagraphs 15(a), (b), (d), and (e) and within sixty days of
the date of this Agreement for those actions identified at
subparagraphs 15(c) and (f):
a. Dollar shall no longer require that an
individual with a disability seeking to rent a vehicle
at a Dollar Operations' facility present both a
driver's license and credit card bearing the same name.
b. Dollar may, however, require the authorized
driver to present a valid driver's license and the
renter to present a qualifying credit card. Dollar may
also require the individual holding the qualifying
credit card to present some form of photo
identification to ensure that he or she is in fact the
same person whose name appears on the credit card. The
individual holding the credit card for payment may be
required to sign the rental contract. Each person who
is permitted to drive the vehicle must present a valid
driver's license, and sign the rental agreement as
authorized driver or as an additional authorized
driver, as applicable. Only persons holding a valid
driver's license may drive the vehicle leased under the
rental contract.
c. Dollar shall inform all employees who have
dealings with prospective renters at Dollar Operations'
facilities of the change in policy, as described in
subparagraph (a) above, and Dollar shall incorporate
the new policy in (a) for Dollar Operations'
facilities, its Policy and Procedure Manual, and (b)
for Licensee facilities, its Operations Guide and other
appropriate training manuals. Dollar shall also
incorporate the new policy into its training programs
for employees at Dollar Operations' facilities and at
all other facilities operated under the name "Dollar
Rent A Car."
d. In addition, all prospective renters at Dollar
Operations' facilities, upon request, shall be advised
of Dollar's change in rental policy as described above.
Further, Dollar Systems shall inform all Licensees who
enter into or renew license agreements on or after the
effective date of this Agreement that the Licensee
shall advise all prospective renters at Licensee, upon
request, of the change in rental policy as described
above.
e. Further, Dollar shall incorporate by reference
its Operations Guide into those of its license
agreements that are entered into or renewed on or after
the effective date of this Agreement.
f. Dollar shall make available at Dollar
Operations' facilities to those sight-impaired
individuals who are unable to read the rental contract
a recorded version of same, either through local audio
equipment or via an 800 telephone number, or Dollar
shall otherwise ensure that the terms of the rental
contract are effectively communicated to individuals
who are blind or have visual impairments.
******************************
If you or a friend would like to remember the National
Federation of the Blind in your will, you can do so by employing
the following language:
"I give, devise, and bequeath unto National Federation of
the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, a
District of Columbia nonprofit corporation, the sum of $_____ (or
"_____ percent of my net estate" or "The following stocks and
bonds: _____") to be used for its worthy purposes on behalf of
blind persons."
******************************
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT: RADIO SPIRITS
by Kenneth Jernigan
The national office of the Federation has entered into an
agreement with Radio Spirits of Buffalo Grove, Illinois,
concerning the distribution of old-time radio programs. Radio
Spirits has an extremely large collection of programs from the
golden era of radio--Jack Benny, Fred Allen, Fibber McGee,
Gunsmoke, Lux Radio Theatre, Orson Welles, One Man's Family, and
literally hundreds and thousands of others. For every cassette
that you or your friends buy from Radio Spirits, the NFB will
receive a contribution, provided you indicate in your telephone
call or your letter that you are calling in connection with the
NFB promotion. The toll free number is (800) 729-4587. You may
request information about the availability of specific radio
shows, or you may ask for a free catalogue. Every time you call
or write, you should make certain to indicate your connection
with the National Federation of the Blind. Not only will you be
helping finance our movement--you will also discover a veritable
gold mine of old-time radio treasures. All of us should help
promote this effort by asking any of our friends who are
interested in old-time radio to call Radio Spirits and indicate
that they are connected with the Federation.
RECIPES
This month's recipes come from members of the National
Federation of the Blind of New York.
[Photo #22 Portrait Caption: Tracy Carcione]
VEGETARIAN SHEPHERD'S PIE
by Tracy Carcione
Tracy Carcione is an active member of the New York City
Chapter of the NFB of New York.
Ingredients:
2 turnips or 1 rutabaga
1 package frozen corn
1 package baby carrots
3 or 4 cloves garlic
1 small onion
Cinnamon
Pepper
Salt
5 potatoes
Milk
Method: I have listed what I consider essential ingredients.
Frozen carrots may be substituted for baby carrots. You could
also add any other vegetable you might have in the refrigerator,
such as eggplant, cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, green beans, or
whatever else seems good to you.
Chop the turnips into small pieces. If you use rutabaga
instead, steam it for a few minutes to soften it. Also steam the
baby carrots. Cut any other fresh vegetables into small pieces.
Chop the onions and garlic and saute them until soft. Put all the
vegetables in a deep casserole dish. Season generously with
cinnamon and pepper. Add any or all of the following: cumin,
allspice, sage, rosemary, and thyme. Make mashed potatoes. I
usually cook the potatoes in the microwave, then take off the
skins when they've cooled a little. Put the potatoes in a bowl
with about 1/4 cup of milk and beat until smooth, usually about
two minutes. If the consistency isn't right, add more milk and
beat until smooth. Spread mashed potatoes over the vegetables so
they form a crust (about 1/8 to 1/4 inch thick). Bake at 350
degrees for forty minutes. Serves two people generously with
leftovers.
RHUBARB BREAD
by Tracy Carcione
Ingredients:
1/2 cup milk
2 teaspoons lemon juice
3/4 cup light brown sugar
1/3 cup vegetable oil
1 small egg
1/2 teaspoon vanilla
1 1/4 cup flour
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 pound fresh rhubarb, diced and dusted with flour
1/4 cup chopped walnuts
1/4 cup white sugar
1ź teaspoons butter, softened
Method: In a small bowl combine milk (at room temperature)
with lemon juice and let stand five minutes to sour--milk should
form small curds. In a large bowl combine brown sugar, oil, egg,
and vanilla. Beat until smooth. Sift together the flour, salt,
and baking soda. Add dry ingredients with soured milk to the
sugar mixture, beating after each addition, until smooth. Fold in
rhubarb and nuts. Pour batter into buttered 4-by-8 loaf pan.
Combine white sugar and butter and sprinkle over batter. Preheat
oven to 325 degrees. Bake for one hour or until golden. Let the
bread cool in the pan for ten minutes, then remove from pan to a
rack to finish cooling.
[Photo #23 Portrait Caption: Lori Stayer]
SPUR-OF-THE-MOMENT OMELET
by Lori Stayer
Lori Stayer is a Job Opportunities for the Blind Coordinator
for New York and Editor of the Writers Division quarterly
magazine, Slate and Style.
Ingredients:
4 eggs
4-ounce can bean sprouts
4-ounce can corn
1 small onion, diced
3 to 4 mushrooms, thinly sliced
1 ounce green squash, diced
1 ounce shredded Muenster cheese
Salt & pepper to taste
Method: Sauté the vegetables in a minimal amount of oil on a
big griddle. Beat eggs and pour over sauted veggies. Add shredded
cheese. Turn mixture several times with a spatula till the egg is
cooked. Serves two meal-sized portions.
CHICKEN FRANCAISE
by Debbie Miller
Debbie Miller is a member of the Syracuse Chapter of the NFB
of New York.
Ingredients:
6 boneless chicken breasts, skinned and pounded
1 egg, slightly beaten
Italian bread crumbs
Olive oil
1 stick butter
3 cups white wine
2 cups mushrooms, sliced
2 tablespoons lemon juice
2 tablespoons oregano
3 teaspoons garlic powder
Poppy seeds
Method: Dip chicken in egg, then bread crumbs. Sauté in oil
and butter until brown. Bake in oven with wine, mushrooms, lemon
juice, oregano, and garlic powder for one hour in a 350-degree
oven. Serve over buttered egg noodles and sprinkle with poppy
seeds.
SAUSAGE POTATO CASSEROLE
by Sharon Thompson
Sharon Thompson is a member of the Syracuse Chapter of the
NFB of New York.
Ingredients
1 pound bulk pork sausage
1 10-3/4-ounce can cream of mushroom soup, undiluted
3/4 cup milk
1/4 cup chopped onion
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon pepper
3 cups thinly sliced peeled potatoes (about 1 1/4 pounds)
1 cup (4 ounces) cheddar cheese, shredded
Method: In a large skillet cook sausage until it is no
longer pink, drain. In a bowl combine soup, milk, onion, salt,
and pepper. In an ungreased 11 by 7 by 2 inch baking dish, layer
half the potatoes, then half the soup mixture, then half the
sausage. Repeat these three layers. Cover and bake at 350 degrees
for one and a half hours or until the potatoes are tender.
Uncover and sprinkle with cheese. Return to oven and bake
uncovered until cheese is melted (about five minutes). Yields
four to six servings.
SHEILA'S FAMOUS POTATO SOUP
by Sheila Greene
Sheila Greene is a member of the Syracuse Chapter of the NFB
of New York.
Ingredients:
4 medium onions, chopped
8 carrots, chopped
1 13-ounce can evaporated milk
1 stick butter or margarine
4 stalks celery, chopped
8 potatoes, sliced
1 16-ounce can cream style corn
Pinch curry powder
Method: Cook onion and celery in 2 cups water. Add carrots
and potatoes. Cook until all are tender. Add butter, milk, curry
powder, and corn. Simmer gently for fifteen minutes. Do not boil.
SAUERBRATEN
by Micki Webb
Micki Webb is a member of the Syracuse Chapter of the NFB of
New York.
Ingredients:
3 to 4 pound beef or venison roast
3 cups water
1 cup vinegar
3 tablespoons sugar
1 small bottle catsup
8 to 12 whole cloves
6 to 10 bay leaves
2 large onions
Salt and pepper to taste
Method: Place meat in medium roaster and add all other
ingredients. Cover and roast in moderate oven (about 350 degrees)
until tender (about 2ź to 3 hours). Remove meat, cool, and slice
as thinly as possible. Thicken and strain gravy. Return meat to
gravy and chill overnight. Heat and serve with fried noodles.
[Photo #24 Portrait Caption: Carl Jacobsen]
Never-Fail Dinner
by Carl Jacobsen
Carl Jacobsen is President of the New York City Chapter and
First Vice President of the NFB of New York. He offers Monitor
readers his secret recipe for successful dining:
Reservations!
** ** MONITOR MINIATURES ** **
** Accessible Music Store Online:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
CDnow!, the Internet Music Store, has become the first
retailer on the Internet to introduce a special new format that
greatly facilitates shopping for the visually impaired. This
business was established by the Olim brothers, who contacted the
National Federation of the Blind to help them design a program
particularly suited for blind shoppers. The result is a
customized format using Text to Speech (TTS) mode. TTS is a
combination speaker and software device that allows the computer
to read out loud what is on the screen. CDnow!'s special new
format allows its message to be read logically in TTS mode, while
deleting the unnecessary punctuation.
"CDnow! has certainly made an effort to accommodate the
visually impaired," said David Andrews, Director of the
International Braille and Technology Center for the National
Federation of the Blind. "It offers the visually-impaired
customer access to information that otherwise would be very
difficult to get. The special format enables visually-impaired
users to gather information independently whenever they want it.
This is a liberating step for someone who is blind."
CDnow! has more than 140,000 CDs, cassettes, and mini-discs
available, which translates into almost every rock, jazz, and
classical album currently in print. CDnow! has put the All-Music
Guide on-line, which provides customers with a complete
collection of biographies, ratings, and reviews in an easy-to-use
interface that both computer novices and experts find extremely
useful in facilitating their selections.
To access CDnow! directly, networked users can type "telnet
cdnow.com." To access CDnow!'s special linear format, visually-
impaired users should type "TTS" at the main menu. For more
information about CDnow!, please call Jason Olim at (215) 646-
6125, or send e-mail to "jolim@cdnow.com."
** Elected:
Kristen Jocums, President of the Salt Lake City Chapter of
the National Federation of the Blind of Utah, writes to report
the group's election results: Milt Taylor, First Vice President;
Vince Silas, Second Vice President; and Allen Hicks and Anitra
Webber, Board Members.
[Photo #25 Portrait Caption: Adrienne Asch]
** Appointed:
Dr. Adrienne Asch, Professor of Biology, Ethics, and the
Politics of Human Reproduction at Wellesley College and a long-
time Federationist, was recently appointed to serve as a member
of the Commission on Childhood Disability for a term beginning
January 1, 1995, and ending November 30, 1995. The announced
purpose of the Commission is to evaluate the effects of the
current definition of disability under title XVI of the Social
Security Act as such definition applies to eligibility of
children to receive SSI benefits, the appropriateness of such
definition, and advantages and disadvantages of any alternative
definitions. The Commission will be taking testimony around the
nation and reporting to the Secretary of Health and Human
Services. Congratulations to Dr. Asch.
** Books Available:
The following is information about the two latest NFB
publications to be added to the Library of Congress (NLS)
collection: Standing on One Foot, edited by Kenneth Jernigan (RC
38289), eighty-four pages, read by Scott Sedar. The Library of
Congress annotation reads, "Nine essays by blind adults relating
experiences regarding their blindness. Kenneth Jernigan writes
about the pitfalls of social conditioning and accepting the
public's mistaken ideas of a blind person's limitations. Marc
Maurer describes becoming a father for the first time, and Gwen
Nelson offers her experience as a juror. 1994."
If Blindness Comes (RC 38282), edited by Kenneth Jernigan,
read by Gary Telles, 243 pages. The Library of Congress
annotation reads, "Defining a blind person as one who has to
develop so many alternative techniques as to substantially alter
his pattern of living, this guide encourages the newly blind to
ask, "How can I do it," rather than, "Can I do it?" The history
and purpose of the National Federation of the Blind are discussed
as are other available programs, devices, and employment
information. 1994."
[Photo #26 Tina Blatter, holding her cane, stands at table displaying her
tactile art. Caption: Tina Blatter displays her work at the Art Exhibit and
Sale during the 1994 NFB convention.]
** For Sale:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Braille/large print greeting cards for all occasions with
unique raised design by Tina Blatter, a blind artist. Tactile
collage paintings are also available with Braille/large print
descriptions included. For more information contact Tina Blatter,
Artistic Touch, 100 West Spaulding Street, Lafayette, Colorado
80026, or call (303) 665-5671.
[Photo #27 Portrait Caption: Ken Silverman]
** Appointed to Serve:
Ken Silberman, President of the Southern Maryland Chapter of
the National Federation of the Blind and an engineer at Goddard
Space Flight Center, was recently appointed to the Interagency
Committee on Disability Research (ICDR), established by the
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
(NIDRR). The Committee's purpose is "to promote coordination and
cooperation among federal departments and agencies conducting
research relevant to people with disabilities." At the end of
1995 the group will issue a report to the President and Congress
making recommendations concerning coordination of policy and the
development of objectives and priorities for all federal programs
conducting research related to the rehabilitation of individuals
with disabilities.
** For Sale:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
I have the following Braille books for sale: My Life in
Three Acts, by Helen Hayes (two volumes), $10; Liar's Poker, by
Michael Lewis (three volumes), $20; and Sunset Cooking for Two
(two volumes), $15. I am also looking for anyone who works with
preschool kids. I am trying to find some different activities and
ideas. Please write in Braille or on cassette to Laurie Marsch,
211 Southbrooke, #6, Waterloo, Iowa 50702, or call after 5:00
p.m., Central Time (319) 232-1750.
** Information Wanted:
Tracy and Eric Duffy are expecting their first baby, so
Tracy wrote asking the following:
I would like to hear from experienced blind parents. I am
particularly interested in advice about strollers, backpacks, car
seats, and other equipment that people have found useful. What
types or brands have you found especially efficient or easy to
use? Please write to me at 2405 Adams Avenue, Columbus, Ohio
43202, or call (614) 262-9378.
** Playback Equipment Needed:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Professor S.K. Oswal from Tennessee is helping develop a
Library for the Blind in New Delhi, India. The project currently
needs two types of equipment: (1) four-track, 15/16 IPS speed
cassette recorders and (2) 8 1/3- and 16 1/3- RPM disk players
capable of playing Library of Congress format books (both in good
working condition). If you have one or more of these commercially
produced machines and wish to donate them, please contact
Professor Oswal in print or Braille or on cassette at Middle
Tennessee State University, Campus Box 70, Murfreesboro,
Tennessee 37132, or call (615) 898-2573.
** For Sale:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
I have for sale an IBM model L40-SX laptop computer package,
which includes the following: 386-SX, 20 Mhz, 10MB RAM and 85MB
hard drive, 1 serial port, 1 parallel port, 1 docking station
port, 1 VGA port, 1 mouse port, full 101-key keyboard, 10-inch
LCD VGA display, one 2.5-inch, 1.44MB floppy disk drive; 2
rechargeable NICAD battery packs; Accent mini internal speech
synthesizer; and Vocal-Eyes, version 2.2 screen reading software.
Price, $1,200 or best offer. Contact Andy Baracco by email,
abaracco@netcom.com or call (818) 901-8216.
** Honored:
On February 12, 1995, Ed and Toni Eames received the Maxwell
Medallion from the Dog Writers Association of America at its
annual awards ceremony. Their article, "Kirby's Miracle," which
dealt with the rehabilitation of Ed's guide dog after cancer
necessitated the amputation of his left front leg, was voted the
best 1994 feature article in a dog magazine. The ceremony was
held in New York City the night before the opening of the
Westminster Dog Show.
** Reader Service Available:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
I am a sighted reader, and I read almost anything printed in
English onto cassette tapes. My fee is $6 an hour. I specialize
in textbooks for school and college, and I will also read
instructional manuals. For more information please write to
Teresa Simon, 12400 Rojas, #80, El Paso, Texas 79927.
** For Sale:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Castle is a cassette chess publication pertaining to the
interests of the blind chess player. The cost for four issues is
$9. A C-60/90 cassette-duplication service is available as well.
The cost for a single 2- or 4-track tape duplication is $2.50 or
three for $6. Four-by-six-inch, see-through mailers with enclosed
plastic address card and Velcro-dot seal are available for $1.20
apiece. I also have sports highlights cassette albums. "Baseball
and Superbowl History" is one of many. A free taped catalog is
available upon request. The cost of these albums is $3.50 for one
or $10 for three. Please communicate in Braille if possible;
print is acceptable. Checks should be made payable to Gintautas
Burba, 30 Snell Street, Rockton, Massachusetts 02401.
** For Sale:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Braille 'n Speak Model 640, 1994 version; disk drive; serial
to parallel converter; World Port 2400 bps pocket modem; all
connecting cables and leather carrying cases $1,500. Please write
or call Harold Snider, 3224 Beret Lane, Silver Spring, Maryland
20906 or home telephone (301) 460-4142, work telephone (410) 659-
9314.
** Congratulations:
Having learned in Chris Boone's article in this issue about
the first round of the negotiation competition for law students,
readers will be interested to know that Chris and her partner
Theresia Urich participated in the National Negotiation
Competition in mid-February and came in second in the nation.
Congratulations to Chris and her partner.
** Correspondence Wanted:
Cathy and Martha Harris, members of the NFB of Pennsylvania
and former members of the Baltimore chapter, would like to
receive letters from NFB members. Martha is seven. She is in
first grade and attends a public school in Altoona, Pennsylvania.
She is totally blind, has learned grade 1 Braille, and is
learning grade 2. She would appreciate receiving letters from
other blind children.
Cathy says of herself: "I am recently divorced and am blind.
Martha is my only child. I enjoy reading, handcrafted ceramic and
wooden items, music, cooking and baking, and collecting recipes.
I would really appreciate receiving letters from NFB members.
Write to Martha and/or me at: 1528 - Crawford Avenue, Altoona,
Pennsylvania 16602.